Displaying posts published in

August 2017

Austin Ruse has an essential book out battling the fake science supporting all of the Left’s agendas. Andrew Harrod

‘Science’ is now a cover for the leftist agenda,” writes Austin Ruse in his recent book. Fake Science: Exposing the Left’s Skewed Statistics, Fuzzy Facts, and Dodgy Data fights this agenda’s alchemy that turns fiction into policy.https://stream.org/austin-ruses-new-book-debunks-fake-science/

“Scientists are not priests,” Ruse warns. He sees a danger in way modern people revere some scientists. “Fully trained doctors experimented on Jews in Nazi Germany.” This example shows how many scientists “have held irrational and very unscientific beliefs over the years.” And with “transgenderism” today, “thoroughly respectable doctors are castrating little boys on the pretense that they can turn them into women.”
Pop Science Preachers

Ruse doubts the merits of many pop science preachers. Astronomy star Carl Sagan once spoke about the “long-discredited ‘ontology recapitulates phylogeny’ theory of a nineteenth-century Darwinist named Ernst Haeckel.” “Transgenderism” booster “Bill Nye the Science Guy” is a sketch comedian with a degree in mechanical engineering.

Ruse proves that science’s peer review process is not sacred. The process has missed many papers that later won Nobel Prizes. This process today “has become a way for the leftwing ‘consensus’ to circle the wagons and shoot down any challenge to their agenda.” The website Retraction Watch reports only on scandals in scholarly research.

“Even when there’s not obvious political pressure to skew results, scientists are human beings,” Ruse notes. The “iconic status of ‘science’ in the world today,” as well as the “huge amounts of government money at stake, means that the rewards for dishonesty are enormous.”

He mocks the idea that laymen must obey “science.” “Forgive me, Father-Scientist, up until now I did not believe that a man could become a woman. But now I do. I will do penance and promise to sin no more.”
False Promises

Much of Ruse’s book refutes past false promises behind the Sexual Revolution’s “present-day holocaust of disease and death.” He starts with French Revolutionary thinker Marquis de Sade, the French surrealists’ “Divine Marquis.” He “was a notorious rapist and sadist,” Ruse notes, “charged with drugging, kidnapping, torturing, and raping women.”

“We can’t afford to leave science to the frauds, the fakers, and the Left,” Ruse warns.

Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mao Zedong combined killed likely over one hundred million. Yet the “Sexual Revolution dwarfs that.” A hundred million abortions worldwide join millions more deaths from Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs).
Science in Service of the Culture of Death

In the US, Ruse examines abortion and Planned Parenthood. “[N]o lie is too big for an organization that was founded as a eugenics project of Margaret Sanger, an out-and-out racist.” The “complicity of the scientific and medical profession in all the lies” is shameful. This recalls the “shame of the medical and scientific community during the Third Reich.” Among other false hopes, “embryonic stem cells have been a disaster, running wild in human bodies … growing skin and hair inside one poor man’s brain.”

Ruse likewise notes the world’s Malthus craze for “population control.” In a “demographic winter” wolves now appear in abandoned German towns. Worldwide billions of dollars have served the “vanishingly small number of women” who want contraception but cannot get it. More pressing issues include clean water, the lack of which could be lethal for over a billion people.

The Stature of Statues By Linda Goudsmit

The stature of statues is determined by the emotional reaction of observers to what the statues represent. Religious statues, political statues, historical statues commemorating events and achievements all symbolically represent people places or things that observers react to. The power of statues like the power of flags is determined by the reaction they arouse in the observer.

When Obama replaced the statue of Winston Churchill with the statue of Martin Luther King Jr. in his office it was a symbolic gesture. Churchill was perceived as a right-wing extremist until Germany declared war on England and it was clear that Neville Chamberlain’s policies of appeasement (leading from behind) emboldened Hitler. In May of 1940 Parliament voted no confidence in Prime Minister Chamberlain and King George VI appointed Churchill prime minister and minister of defense. Churchill was a powerful leader who rallied the English people during WWII and led his country out of a crippling defeat to victory.

Martin Luther King Jr., the Baptist minister who lead the non-violent movement civil rights movement in America, was a powerful leader whose efforts ultimately secured the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Martin Luther King Jr. remained committed to non-violence and civil disobedience as the methods for social reform – his vision was as successful in his time as Churchill’s was in his.

Here is the problem. Neither Churchill nor Martin Luther King Jr. reflected Obama’s vision for America. After eight years in office it is evident that busts of Saul Alinsky, Frank Marshall Davis, and Edward Said would have been the appropriate busts in Obama’s office. But statues are symbolic and the stature of those statues would have exposed Obama’s actual hope for change in America.

When Barack Obama was elected in 2008 the entire country was hopeful that race relations in America would improve. Americans hoped the country would realize Martin Luther King’s dream and the country would be one United States of America where children would be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin. We hoped that being an American would be the common denominator that bound us all together in common cause to strengthen and realize the American dream.

Americans ignored the company that Obama kept and substituted their own hopes for change when they voted. Americans ignored Obama’s twenty year affiliation with anti-American anti-white black supremacist Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Americans ignored Obama’s affiliation with anti-white anti-American Black Power Frank Marshall Davis. Americans ignored Obama’s relationship with anti-American pro-Muslim professor Edward Said. Americans ignored Obama’s relationship with anti-white law school professor Derrick Bell. Americans ignored Obama’s relationship to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Americans ignored Obama’s mentor radical socialist Saul Alinsky and Obama’s friendship with black supremacist Louis Farrakhan.

Barack Obama’s hope for change was not what most Americans hoped for. Obama’s radical left-wing liberal hope was to weaken America and change our political structure from democracy to socialism. In eight years Obama deliberately fomented racial divisiveness because divisiveness creates the social chaos required for seismic social change.

Obama followed Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” with the commitment of a religious zealot. He cut his hair, stopped smoking crack, put on a suit, honed his skills as a community organizer and began his career of selling snake oil to America. He was groomed to be the presidential candidate to bring socialism to America.

In Obama’s memoir “Dreams from My Father” Obama actually described Alinsky’s trick/tactic. “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied as long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved—such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.” p. 94-95

MY SAY: SELECTIVE OUTRAGE

The Neo- Nazis are a loathsome, loutish, hateful group and the President made a dumb statement about “decent people on both sides.”As a result, the media, the left, and the never Trumpsters are out in force. Even many Republican summer soldiers and sunshine patriots are tucking up their petticoats in high dudgeon. So be it.

The right wing groups are amateur bigots- small in number with very limited national influence- none in the academies or the media. The Antifa groups are professional bigots who know how to manipulate and influence the public….and they employ every perceived gripe from every minority to inflame national rhetoric in order to destroy democracy.

The ones that really get my goat are the hypocrites who use Holocaust metaphor and anti-Semitism to denounce the Neo-Nazis. “This is the ideology that killed six-million Jews” screeched a young man recently. Funny, I never heard him denounce Islamic jihad driven genocidal goals. For that matter he supported Obama’s Iran deal which enabled a regime whose open and avowed and averred aim is to destroy Israel and kill six-million Jews. And he thinks that BDS is just an expression of tough love of Israel.

An e-pal J.P. wrote :

“But the bigger issue is the sudden interest in Nazis, when anti-semitism has been on the rise for the last ten years.Why is it that a couple of hundred anti-semites warrants such massive attention from the mainstream press, from the Democrats, and from the left? And from you? Why don’t they (or you) care when millions of college students get together every year for a week-long celebration of anti-semitism? Is the only difference that the college students don’t display the swastika? Or could it possibly be that all the faux-rage is seen as a way of scoring political points against Trump?”

Well said!

rsk

Muslims Tell Europe: “One Day All This Will Be Ours” by Giulio Meotti

The Archbishop of Strasbourg Luc Ravel, nominated by Pope Francis in February, just declared that “Muslim believers know very well that their fertility is such today, that they call it… the Great Replacement. They tell you in a very calm, very positive way: One day all this, all this will be ours…”.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán just warned against a “Muslimized Europe”. According to him, “the question of the upcoming decades is whether Europe will continue to belong to Europeans”.

“In the coming 30 years, the number of Africans will grow by more than one billion people. That is twice the population of the entire European Union… The demographic pressure will be enormous. Last year, more than 180,000 people crossed in shabby boats from Libya. And this is just the beginning. According to EU Commissioner Avramopoulos, at this very moment, 3 million migrants are waiting to enter Europe”. — Geert Wilders, MP, The Netherlands, and leader of the Party for Freedom and Democracy (PVV).

This week, yet another Islamic terrorist attack targeted the Spanish city of Barcelona. As it was for many years under Muslim rule, it is, therefore, like Israel, land which many Islamists believe they are entitled to repossess.

At the same time, far from Spain, elementary schools have been closing, shuttered by the state after the number of children dropped to less than 10% of the population. The government is converting these structures into hospices, providing care for the elderly in a country where 40% of the people are 65 or older. That is not a science-fiction novel. That is Japan, the world’s oldest and most sterile nation, where there is a popular expression: “ghost civilization”.

According to Japan’s National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, by 2040 most of the country’s smaller cities will see a dramatic drop of one-third to one-half of their population. Due to a dramatic demographic decrease, many Japanese councils can no longer operate and have been closed. Restaurants have decreased from 850,000 in 1990 to 350,000 today, pointing to a “drying up of vitality”. Predictions also suggest that in 15 years, Japan will have 20 million empty houses. Is that also the future of Europe?

Among the experts in demography, there is a tendency to call Europe “the new Japan”. Japan, however, is dealing with this demographic catastrophe with its own resources, and banning Muslim immigration to the country.

“Europe is committing demographic suicide, systematically depopulating itself in what British historian Niall Ferguson has called “the greatest sustained reduction in European population since the Black Death in the fourteenth century'”, as George Weigel recently noted.

Europe’s Muslims appear to be dreaming of filling this vacuum. The Archbishop of Strasbourg, Luc Ravel, nominated by Pope Francis in February, recently declared that “Muslim believers know very well that their fertility is such today, that they call it … the Great Replacement. They tell you in a very calm, very positive way: ‘One day all this, all this will be ours’ …”.

A new report by the Italian think tank Centro Machiavelli just revealed that if current trends continue, by 2065 first- and second-generation immigrants will exceed 22 million persons, or more than 40% of Italy’s total population. In Germany, as well, 36% of children under the age of five are being born to immigrant parents. In 13 of the 28 EU member countries, more people died than were born last year; without migration, the populations of Germany and Italy are expected to decline by 18% and 16%, respectively.

The impact of demographic free-fall is most visible in what was once called the “new Europe”, the countries of the former Soviet bloc such as Poland, Hungary and Slovakia, to distinguish these from the so called “old Europe”, France and Germany. Those Eastern countries are now the ones most exposed to the “depopulation bomb”, the devastating collapse in birth rate that the current-events analyst and author Mark Steyn has called “the biggest issue of our time”.

Confederate Statues Honor Timeless Virtues — Let Them Stay Don’t let extremists on both sides destroy honor and valor, even as they seek to destroy everything else. By Arthur Herman

There are times when I wonder if we’re coming to the harsh, bitter end of the American experiment. The weekend of August 12 was one of them.

My wife and I have lived in Charlottesville for the past 14 years, and on Saturday we got to see the sick political culture that’s infected this country for the past couple of decades sweep over our fair city, leaving three dead and many more seriously injured.

Beth and I like to run in the mornings, and that Saturday morning we headed over to the big four-story parking garage at John Paul Jones Arena, which we sometimes use as our running track when it’s raining or it’s very hot and sunny. Usually the garage is completely empty; that Saturday every bay was filled with a Virginia State Police car, with dozens of other police cars and vans parked along the side. Seeing them gave us both an eerie feeling filled with foreboding; I’d felt the same eeriness that Friday night, when white supremacists held their torchlight vigil at the University of Virginia, in a scene reminiscent of Nazi-party rallies in the 1930s.

Yet even with all these policemen in riot gear, no one could control the violence when extremists from the left and extremists from the right battled each other in the streets in Charlottesville — or the national political firestorm it set off. And all this happened because our city council decided in June it could score some liberal points by having the statue of Robert E. Lee removed from a park downtown, and by changing the name from Lee Park to Emancipation Park.

They’re not alone, of course; they’re part of a trend that’s sweeping — or, I prefer to say infecting — the country right now, and not just in the South.

I’ve heard many arguments as to why statues commemorating Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and other Confederate war heroes should come down in Charlottesville; and not many why they should stay, except from white supremacists who have no honest or rational views on the matter. So maybe it’s time for someone who is a scholar, a historian — a Pulitzer Prize finalist historian, and the New York Times–bestselling author of nine books — and a lifelong Civil War buff to rehearse the reasons why they should remain, and why, if they come down now under violent pressure from the Left, we may be losing a lot more than statues of dead Confederate heroes.

First of all, these are not “Confederate monuments.” They are monuments to the dead, soldiers who fought and often died for the Confederate cause. They were erected years after the Civil War. For example, the bronze Lee statue in Lee Park dates to 1924. It was begun by a French sculptor, completed by an Italian-immigrant artist, and then cast by a company in the Bronx. These monuments were dedicated to memorialize the courage and sacrifice that these Southern men and, in some cases, women (one of the sculptures in Baltimore pulled down earlier this week was dedicated “to the Confederate women of Maryland”) brought to a cause that they believed at the time deserved the same “last full measure of devotion” that their Northern counterparts brought to theirs. Of course, some of those who paid for and erected these statues also believed that cause had been right, not wrong. (I’ll say more about that in a minute.) But in the final analysis, they are monuments to timeless virtues, not to individuals.

On Charlottesville, Trump, and Anti-Americanism The president made some idiotic remarks, but he knows something the elites overlook. By Andrew C. McCarthy

Susan Rosenberg was a terrorist in the early 1980s. Like her Weathermen comrades, she would have killed many people had she been a more competent terrorist. She was a fugitive plotting more bombings when she and a co-conspirator were captured in New Jersey, armed to the gills and toting over 700 pounds of dynamite. At her sentencing, she proclaimed, “Long live the armed struggle” against “U.S. imperialism.” Her only regret was that she hadn’t shot it out with the police who arrested her. A federal judge sentenced her to 58 years’ imprisonment.

I know her story well because, when she claimed she was being denied parole unlawfully, I spent over a year as the prosecutor arguing that the court should keep her in the slammer. Finally, the court ruled against her.

So . . . Bill Clinton sprang her.

Her commutation may have outraged most Americans, but it was celebrated by the nation’s “progressive” opinion elites, the same ones who were cool with President Clinton’s release of the FALN terrorists. Granted, Rosenberg didn’t get the hero’s welcome at New York City’s Puerto Rican Day parade received by Oscar Lopez Rivera — the FALN terrorist released by President Obama. The teaching gig the Left arranged for her wasn’t quite as prestigious and long-lived as the ones her fellow Weathermen — and Obama pals — Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn fell into. She’ll never be a t-shirt icon, like Che Guevara or Tupac Shakur. The campaign to pretend she was innocent won’t rival the Alger Hiss fairy tale. There will probably be no statue of her, much less a performing-arts center like the one in Princeton named for Paul Robeson.

But she hates America, so she’ll be remembered fondly in the places where the cultural tune is called. Her books — such as An American Radical: A Political Prisoner in My Own Country — will continue to be taken oh so seriously. Her Wikipedia entry does not describe her as a terrorist; it says Susan Rosenberg is a “radical political activist, author and advocate for social justice.”

That’s why you got Trump.

It has nothing to do with statues of the dead. It is about the status of the living.

You’re upset over President Trump’s idiotic remarks this week? Oh, right, I need to specify. Not the crackpot bit about General Pershing mass-murdering Muslim prisoners in the Philippines (well explained by David French, here). I mean the one about the “very fine people” in Charlottesville — the supposed “many” who joined neo-Nazis, KKK die-hards, and other white supremacists in a demonstration that could not have been more overtly racist and despicable.

Yeah, I’m upset about that, too.

That doesn’t mean I didn’t notice the anti-fa thugs were out there. It doesn’t mean I don’t see the hard Left’s seditionist shock troops, at war with the country, much like the Weathermen, the Panthers, and the Black Liberation Army back in the day. As we’ve seen many times now (and will, alas, see many times more), the radical Left doesn’t need tiki-torch twits to spur them to arson and mayhem.

This time, though, in Charlottesville, the white supremacists were the instigators. They caused it. They orchestrated this disgusting event, they came ready for the violence they knew they were provoking, and one of them committed a murder.

If the roles were reversed, we wouldn’t want to hear a bunch of imbecilic “there’s blame on both sides” moral equivalence. We’d want the most culpable bunch called out and condemned, by name — and without any irrational hedging about phantom “very fine people” who confederate with sociopaths on the latter’s terms.

Missouri State Senator: ‘I Hope Trump Is Assassinated’ By Tyler O’Neil

FEEL THE LOVE??????RSK

On Thursday, a Democratic Missouri state senator posted, and then quickly deleted, a Facebook comment saying she hoped President Donald Trump would be assassinated. Democrats have called for her to resign, but she refused.

“I hope Trump is assassinated!” Maria Chappelle-Nadal, the state senator from University City, said in her comment, as preserved by radio host Mark Reardon.

As a result of Chappelle-Nadal’s comment, the U.S. Secret Service’s St. Louis field office is investigating, and both Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Stephen Webber called on her to resign.

Chappelle-Nadal posted the comment out of frustration with the “trauma and despair” the president has caused with his statements about the events in Charlottesville, Va., the Kansas City Star reported.

“The way I responded this morning was wrong,” Chappelle-Nadal said. “I’m frustrated. Did I mean the statement? No. Am I frustrated? Absolutely. The president is causing damage. He’s causing hate.”

The state senator posted the comment on her personal Facebook page, which is not open to the public. “On my personal Facebook, I put up a statement saying that I really hate Trump. He’s causing trauma and nightmares. That was my original post,” Chappelle-Nadal added. Her assassination comment came later down in the thread.

“It was wrong for me to post that,” she said. “But I am not going to shy away from the damage this president is causing.”

Chappelle-Nadal recalled the three-year anniversary of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, a city she represents in the state senate. She also noted the NAACP’s travel advisory for Missouri, which warns that civil rights would not be respected in the state.

“There are people who are afraid of going out in the streets,” she said. “It’s worse than even Ferguson.” She blamed such a climate on the president. His comments this weekend “make it easier for racists to be racists.”

Missouri State Senate Minority Leader Gina Walsh (D) condemned Chappelle-Nadal’s comment. “Promoting, supporting or suggesting violence against anyone, especially our elected leaders, is never acceptable,” Walsh said. “There is too much rancor and hate in today’s political discourse, and Sen. Chappelle-Nadal should be ashamed of herself for adding her voice to this toxic environment.”

Sen. McCaskill agreed. “I condemn it. It’s outrageous. And she should resign,” she said in a statement. CONTINUE AT SITE

Peter Smith Onward, Christian Soldiers!

Islam denies the divinity of Christ while venerating a warlord of decidedly unsavoury disposition. That many Christian leaders prefer to swap warm and cuddly platitudes with representatives of a creed bent on their subjugation would make St Paul’s jaw drop.

I was reading an interesting article (The Future of Christianity) by Anglican priest and regular Quadrant contributor Michael Giffin, who stopped me in my tracks by saying the Bible is silent about the Islamic threat. He added that he was proud that “for the most part, the Church has remained consistently silent about the supposed Islamic threat and stuck to preaching the Gospel of Christ.”

Now I admit to wanting the Christian churches to be more muscular when it comes to Islam. First, what do I mean by being more muscular? Well there is a middle course between Pope John Paul II kissing the Koran, as he did, and poking imams in the eye with a burnt stick. It’s a question of balance. To my mind a proper balance is not struck when Christian Church leaders make overtures towards Islam. Interfaith dialogue is misconceived, in my view, when the other side is committed to taking over.

It is no accident that where Islam predominates Christianity and Christians are driven out. Christ was not a doormat and neither should be those whose job it is carry his message. And it is a grave mistake to think the Bible is silent on the Islamic issue. Christ was quite clear about false prophets arising. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.”(Matthew 7:15-16)

How much clearer could He have been? St Paul was pretty clear as well in his letter to the Galatians:

…there are some who are confusing you to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven [even, I add, the Archangel Gabriel to Mohammed in a cave] should proclaim to you a different gospel contrary to what we have proclaimed, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!

This should be instructive and alerting for those Christians who have ears to hear. St Paul bears reiterating: Let those who proclaim a gospel contrary to the gospel of Christ be accursed. Not invited, you will notice, to morning tea by the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss matters of common faith. There is no faith in common. Islam denies the divinity of Christ and places a man of unsavoury disposition above Him in the pecking order. It is just not tenable to sit down with these people as purveyors of a false gospel.

Nor is it tenable to ignore them and remain silent when the faith to which they owe allegiance is responsible for the persecution of Christians. Whether Edmund Burke said it or not, it is surely true that the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. I cannot see that Christian churches are right to simply stand by and allow the propagation of hateful scripture to go directly unanswered and unchallenged.

If a number of Popes in history had not taken up the cudgels it is doubtful that Christianity would have survived the militaristic onslaught of Islam. The fight isn’t over until both sides disengage. The other side have not disengaged.

Civil War Breaking Out at Fox News By Peter Barry Chowka

An internal civil war is tearing at the fabric of Fox News. The events of the past week have brought the long-simmering conflict closer to the surface. The legitimacy and viability of President Trump are under constant assault in the mainstream media as never before – and that is saying something. Fox News Channel executives, staff, and on air talent are taking sides. The future direction of the right-of-center, fair and balanced Fox News approach to presenting the news may well be in serious doubt.

One week ago in Charlottesville, Virginia, a melee that involved Nazis, the alt-right, Antifa, and anarchists resulted in the death of one woman with at least 20 more people injured. The whole country seems to be taking sides or at least trying to understand what really happened that led to such a violent confrontation over the future of Civil War statues and monuments on public land. Most mainstream news organizations are siding with the left-wing narrative and blaming President Trump for his unconventional reaction to the events at Charlottesville. They are also largely absolving the anarchist and Antifa participants of any responsibility for the violence that took place.

Fox News still has its defenders of Trump. But they are increasingly being outnumbered by other hosts, contributors, and guests on the channel. Newsweek, an anti-Trump publication, put it this way in its August 17 story “Fox News Can’t Stop Literally Crying About Donald Trump’s Worst Week Yet:”

It’s been a bizarre week for the folks at Fox News…. For many of the network’s personalities, it’s been one of the most challenging weeks since Trump took office – and the tears have been steadily streaming on live television for its millions of viewers nationwide.

A Trail of Tears

On Thursday, August 17, during a live discussion of the Charlottesville rally five days earlier, Fox News anchor and host Melissa Francis, according to Newsweek, was having a hard time:

“I am so uncomfortable having this conversation,” Francis said, bursting into tears. “I know what’s in my heart, and I know that I don’t think anyone is different, better or worse based on the color of their skin. But I feel like there is nothing any of us can say right now without being judged.”

Melissa Francis

As Newsweek described the moment:

The tears arrived after Francis’s fellow anchors, Juan Williams and Marie Harf [Harf is in fact a contributor, not an anchor], both rejected her support for the president’s statements[.] . . Francis was then comforted by Harris Faulkner, a black female anchor for the network’s show Outnumbered, who said “there have been a lot of tears on our network, and across the country and around the world.”

There was more crying when Abby Huntsman, filling in as a Fox & Friends weekday co-host on Wednesday morning, was discussing the controversy over Confederate statues and the President’s reaction to Charlottesville with two black guests. Newsweek provided the transcript:

“It’s beyond a monument. This is about hatred. This is about white supremacy,” Democratic contributor Wendy Osefo said Wednesday.

“There are good people on both sides of this debate.…” Huntsman responded, seemingly attempting to pivot away from an emotional conversation.

But when she leaned on her Republican pundit Gianno Caldwell for support, she was met with more disdain for the president’s behavior – and more tears.

“I come today with a very heavy heart,” Caldwell said, wiping away tears. “Last night, I couldn’t sleep at all because president Trump, our president, has literally betrayed the conscience of our country.”

“No…” Huntsman interjected, trailing off.

Charlottesville Is Not about the Forces of Good vs. the Forces of Evil By Abraham H. Miller

The chaos in Charlottesville is about two groups of fascists taunting each other in the public square and fighting it out
If President Trump called out each right-wing bigot that invaded Charlottesville, it would not be enough. Some obsessive Trump antagonist standing behind the arc of Klieg lights while holding a microphone would find that somehow, somewhere, he had left out something.

If there is anything we can agree on, say liberal pundits, it is that fascism is evil, and Trump should have rushed to condemn them after the vehicular assault on demonstrators.

James Fields, the alleged perpetrator of the vehicular assault in Charleston, is identified as a white nationalist but belonged to no group. Moreover, he seems to be mentally ill.

The Army discharged Fields after a few months in a manner that bespeaks mental problems — but let’s not raise that issue. It will prevent us from feeling sanctimonious about condemning the right.

We most certainly would not want to put Fields in the same category as Major Nidal Hassan, He committed that act of workplace violence at Fort Hood, slaughtering fellow soldiers while shouting “Allahu Akbar.”

When former attorney general Eric Holder jumped into the discussion of the Charlottesville vehicular killing, calling it terrorism, he was summarily mocked for his contrasting depiction of Hassan as merely a perpetrator of workplace violence. The hypocrisy was palpable.

Of course, nearly everyone wants Trump to condemn only the right. Far be it for us to examine the politics of the left.

If we think of fascism as a system of authoritarian rule, the suppression of basic liberties, a belief system organized around hatred for the “other” and the inevitability and glory of war (or violence) as a solution to political problems, there were a lot of candidates for the label in the streets of Charlottesville. Some of them were most definitely from the left.

If we can all agree that fascists should be condemned, let’s not stop with the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, let’s demand that the President condemn all the fascists.

The American Jewish Committee has called on President Trump to condemn the far-right groups in Charlottesville. Let us disabuse them of the idea that only the far right is anti-Semitic. One thing nearly every one of the major groups in the street shared is their antipathy toward Jews.

Yet the AJC depicted the events in Charleston as a conflict between the voices of hate and those who chose to stop hate in its tracks. We wonder if the AJC bothers to read the news or just dreams up this material. Since when are Black Lives Matter and Antifa concerned about stopping hate, especially hatred against Jews?

While progressive Jews were being warriors for social justice and the causes of others, the far left and their Muslim allies were building intersectionality, whose very foundation is anti-Semitism. Intersectionality singles out the world’s only Jewish state as a source of oppression and the denial of human rights. Not only is the characterization mindless, but every Muslim state busy stoning gays and female rape victims is given a pass.

That’s why Jews and Jewish symbols were bluewashed from Chicago’s Dyke March and Jews were found to be of insufficient virtue to participate in the city’s Slut Walk.