Displaying posts published in

January 2019

Sexual Harassment and Cultural Masochism Graham Cunningham

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/01/sexual-harassment-and-cultural-masochism/

From the country which did nothing to stop and much to ignore Rotherham’s grooming gangs of Subcontinental predators comes a slanderous TV ad intended to combat sexual harassment on public transport. The villain with the roving hands and thrusting crotch? A middle-class white male of course.

One of the biggest media narratives of 2019 will be the liberal morality play of selective-outrage at the sexual peccadilloes of Donald Trump and his alleged attempts to hide them. It will no doubt run and run. And this may well be just as it should be, although it is worth mentally stepping back and reminding oneself that many much-revered statesmen of former times will have been guilty of very similar behaviour but which was kept well out of the public eye.

We are endlessly told in our Anglosphere media that we now live in a globalised world; and in many ways we do. It is ironic then that when it comes to some global issues – such as the oppression of women by men – that same media is the very essence of parochialism. The casting-couch sexual pressure faced by some Western women on their way up the ladder of fame and fortune is a bigger story than an Indian woman sentenced by village elders to be gang-raped as punishment for the supposed transgressions of her brother and now living in terror of her neighbours.

Then there is the tricky issue of ‘racism’: defined, in media terms, as something of which only white people can be guilty. Liberal preciousness about ‘racism’ means that even within the confines of our wealthy developed world, media coverage of sexual harassment depends on who is doing the harassing. This is why, in the UK, the rape and terrorising of hundreds of non-Muslim girls by gangs of Pakistani men went unreported for years.

It also gives rise to endless media fictions in television drama and advertisements. Like this one: it’s standing room only on a London Underground train…man in a grey suit is staring at the rear of a woman in a white suit. The carriage is roaring and rolling along the tunnel. Man’s stare is steady and menacing. She is oblivious…. until he leans in to her and surreptitiously fingers her bottom. He is white, middle class and around forty. His face has something of the stuck-up, repressed Brit of Hollywood caricature; the curl of his thin upper lip, the damp pallor of his skin and the cold, glazed eyes all suggestive of some kind of droit du seigneur fantasist. She is black, thirty-something and also middle class. Professional in appearance and attractive, she looks like she might one day get cast as one of those alluring TV female special agents, complete with side-arm weapon and karate black belt. She is circumspectly but determinedly ignoring the situation but he persists and eventually, on the pretext of making room for other passengers, he thrusts his groin into her behind just as the train pulls into the next station, where she escapes.

Bad News Biden, Obama Says Country Needs “New Blood” Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/272501/bad-news-biden-obama-says-country-needs-new-blood-daniel-greenfield

Joe Biden gets 90% of his cred from behind the white guy standing behind Obama in a bunch of photos. But Obama didn’t endorse him in 2016, instead he seems to have dissuaded him from running. Biden is hoping that 2020 will be his year, but I’ve questioned that.

Biden’s past hesitancy to run has little to do with supposed family grief, though he is cynically ready to run as a mourning father, rather than the unprincipled careerist and narcissistic hack that he actually is. His problems are legion and obvious. There’s no other race he would have a better and worse shot at. But his only asset is being Obama’s comic relief. And he won’t step forward until he’s locked down Obama’s support so that he can wear the ultimate icon of diversity as his political human shield.

Obama isn’t fond of the idea. That’s why he’s been willing to meet with anyone who isn’t Biden. The candidates Obama favors may be diverse, but more importantly young, Beto, Gillium and Deval Patrick. Obama could hardly be sending Biden a clearer message that he wants someone who is his opposite.

Meanwhile, like a deluded bride, Biden keeps waiting at the altar for Obama to come back to him. If Biden stays on top of the field, Obama may have no choice to back him, as he reluctantly backed Hillary. But Biden’s expectation that he can use Obama to stave off attacks in the primaries is misguided.

The message is becoming less subtle.

Kamala Harris Says She’s Open To Ocasio-Cortez’s Socialist Agenda By David Marcus

http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/08/kamala-harris-says-open-ocasio-cortezs-socialist-agenda/

Call it the Ocasio-Cortez Effect! Just two days after the freshman congresswoman announced on “60 Minutes” that Democrats should soak the rich with a 70 percent marginal tax rate, presidential hopeful Sen. Kamala Harris said on “The View” that she is open to it. Drawing on her experience as a teacher, Harris commended Ocasio-Cortez for “challenging the status quo,” and promised to “explore new ideas.”

Among these new ideas, on which Meghan McCain questioned Harris, were more than just the confiscatory tax rates AOC put on the table. They included plans to end carbon emissions by 2030, including all cars. Yes, that’s right, Harris would not even say that ending private ownership of cars was off the table. Presumably, not having to shell out for car payments and gas will help Americans afford the new tax regime.

For weeks now, those on the left and some on the right have chided conservatives for being obsessed with Ocasio-Cortez. She’s just a freshman congresswoman, why are your knickers in a bunch? A manufactured story about conservative anger at her dancing in a video in college emerged this week. Surely conservatives are just put off by a powerful young woman of color.

Actually, what conservatives are put off by is socialism, which includes a life of 70 percent tax rates and being told they can’t own a car.

When one of the major contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, particularly one trying to represent the left wing, endorses this kind of thinking? It’s not just conservatives being shook by a radical young woman, it’s Democrats embracing her ideology in a significant way.

Beto O’Rourke: Southern Border ‘One of the Safest Places’ in US By Mairead McArdle

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/beto-orourke-southern-border-one-of-the-safest-places-in-us/

Representative Beto O’Rourke (D., Texas) called the southern border “one of the safest places in the United States” late Tuesday night, hours after President Trump delivered an Oval Office address on the need for a border wall.

“By any measure the border is as safe as it’s ever been,” O’Rourke said in a video of the border he took and posted on Twitter. “And the president’s using fear and anecdote to try to instill anxiety and paranoia to build the political will to construct this wall that would cost $30 billion and take private property and cause death and suffering as more asylum seekers are pushed to ever-more hostile stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border.”

“That was what we heard from the Oval Office,” O’Rourke said. “And we need to meet that fear with the truth, with our ambition, with the best traditions of this country, a country of immigrants.”

The president on Tuesday evening delivered his first Oval Office address, calling on Democrats to relent and approve his demand for over $5 billion in funding for the construction of a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.
13

Trump made his remarks amid an ongoing partial government shutdown, which reached its nineteenth day on Wednesday. Negotiations broke down shortly before Christmas, with Democrats refusing to budge from their offer of $1.6 billion for non-wall border security and Republicans sticking to Trump’s demand for over $5 billion to fund construction of a wall.

In November, O’Rourke lost his Senate bid to incumbent Ted Cruz in a race that was alarmingly competitive for the Texas GOP. Despite his defeat, O’Rourke became a rising Democratic star and is rumored to be considering a 2020 presidential bid.

The Antithesis of Green By Robert Bryce

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/green-new-deal-renewable-energy-cannot-meet-needs/

Vast stretches of land would be needed for an all-renewable scenario. Which is why landowners are fighting solar and wind companies.

The energetic chatter of the moment is dominated by talk about the Green New Deal — a collection of proposals that would require running the entire American economy on renewable electricity within a decade or so.

The Green New Deal has been endorsed by scads of liberal politicians including New York governor Andrew Cuomo, former California state senator Kevin de León, media darling and newly sworn-in Democratic representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and anti-hydrocarbon activist Josh Fox. The goals of the Green New Deal are nothing short of radical. As the website for the left-wing think tank Data for Progress explains, the Green New Deal aims to “transform the economy and the environment in ways that achieve sustainability, equity, justice, freedom, and happiness.” Achieving happiness has never been easy. Even harder will be the Green New Deal’s aim of completely eliminating the use of coal, oil, and natural gas by 2050.

How all this happiness and energy legerdemain will be achieved is anyone’s guess. Supporters are particularly vague about how they would find the hundreds of billions — or even trillions — of dollars needed to attempt such a plan. Nevertheless, there is one unassailable fact about the Green New Deal: It is not green. Indeed, the entire notion of an all-renewable-energy system is the antithesis of environmental protection and scenic conservation.

The backers of the Green New Deal — along with their allies at big environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and others that tout all-renewable schemes — refuse to acknowledge the simple truth that deploying renewable energy at the scale required to fuel the U.S. economy would require covering state-sized territories with nothing but wind turbines and solar panels. It would also require stringing tens of thousands of miles of new high-voltage transmission lines.

Democratic Congresswoman Calls Out Fellow Democrats for ‘Religious Bigotry’ By Alexandra DeSanctis

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/democratic-congresswoman-calls-out-fellow-democrats-for-religious-bigotry/

Representative Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, published an op-ed in The Hill yesterday, implicitly criticizing two of her fellow Democratic congresswomen for subjecting a judicial nominee to a religious test as a result of his Catholic faith and his long-time membership in the Knights of Columbus.

Though she doesn’t mention them by name, Gabbard was referring to Democratic senators Kamala Harris (Calif.) and Mazie Hirono (Hawaii), both of whom have targeted federal judicial nominee Brian Buescher for his Catholicism, and the latter of whom has demanded that he drop his membership in the Knights and recuse himself from any case on which the organization has taken a position.

Gabbard does explicitly cite the controversial comments of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), who in the fall of 2017 questioned circuit-court nominee Amy Coney Barrett about her Catholic faith during her confirmation hearing, saying, “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.” Feinstein’s remark received significant backlash from the right, and from Catholics in particular, who rightly noted the senator’s obvious implication that practicing Catholics are not suited to serve on U.S. courts as a result of their faith.

“While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus,” Gabbard went on. More from her op-ed:

The party that worked so hard to convince people that Catholics and Knights of Columbus like Al Smith and John F. Kennedy could be both good Catholics and good public servants shows an alarming disregard of its own history in making such attacks today. We must call this out for what it is – religious bigotry. . . . Elected leaders engaging in religion-baiting are playing with fire.

Predictably, the Democratic congresswoman has come under fire from at least one progressive commentator for making this argument:

Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel, for his part, attempted to explain the reaction to Gabbard’s op-ed, but did so fairly clumsily: “Gabbard began her political career as a social conservative, has made amends, but her reaction to conservative media coverage of ‘anti-Catholic’ Dems is leaving a mark. This *really* gets under Dems’ skin. Many are Catholic themselves and are accused of religious bigotry if they ask conservative Catholic nominees about their on-record ideology.”
Comments

Meanwhile, the Post’s Jennifer Rubin, whose Twitter bio describes her as a “conservative blogger,” blithely dismissed Gabbard’s concerns about religious tests, tweeting, “I cannot imagine a stupider issue that impacts no one’s real life. anywhere. ever.” Perhaps Rubin is unaware of the fact that the Knights boast nearly 2 million members, most of whom are American, and one of whom is Gabbard’s own father, according to Hawaii News Now.

And Rubin, along with Gabbard’s other critics and much of the left, seems to care little for the reality that anyone who buys into rhetoric such as that of Feinstein and Harris and Hirono is telling American Catholics that their religious beliefs disqualify them from public service.

Warning Her Life Is in Danger for Renouncing Islam, Saudi Pleads for Australia Asylum By Bridget Johnson

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/warning-her-life-is-in-danger-for-renouncing-islam-australia-weighs-saudis-asylum-plea/

A young Saudi woman fleeing family abuse is awaiting a decision on whether Australia will grant her asylum request after a dramatic standoff — broadcast on social media — with Thai officials who impeded her escape.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees said Monday that Rahaf Mohammed Al-qunun, 18, was safe for the moment after having her passport seized in Bangkok en route from Kuwait to Australia.

Al-qunun barricaded herself in a Thai hotel room over the weekend to avoid deportation, tweeting to draw attention to her plight: “I am the girl who escaped Kuwait to Thailand. My life is in danger if I’m forced to return to Saudi Arabia.”

“I’m rahaf mohmed, formally seeking a refugee status to any country that would protect me from getting harmed or killed due to leaving my religion and torture from my family,” she tweeted on Monday.

Al-Qunun said she was confined in her room for six months for cutting her hair, and has suffered beatings and death threats from her male relatives.

Australian reporter Sophie McNeill locked herself in the room as well to help protect Al-qunun.

A network of Saudi women’s rights activists jumped in to help get #SaveRahaf trending. One of those women, who lives in Canada with her husband, told CBC that she’s now “actually feeling some kind of guilt because her story went viral and I’ve heard about other other women that have been, like, their fathers their brothers, they just took their phone.”

“It is scary. You know, even when you are trying to support this campaign in Saudi Arabia, you always have to cover your tracks,” she said. “I have my family there in Saudi Arabia. They don’t know that I am doing this. I was talking to my father when I last visited my family in Saudi. My father just told me that … if I’m thinking to just leave Islam and not be a Muslim anymore, that he’s going to kill me by himself. And I just got so scared.” CONTINUE AT SITE

‘Bye-bye’: Trump walks out of ‘waste of time’ meeting with Schumer, Pelosi by Steven Nelson

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bye-bye-trump-walks-out-of-waste-of-time-meeting-with-schumer-pelosi?utm_source=WEX_Breaking%20News%20Alert_01/09/2019&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WEX_Breaking%20News

President Trump on Wednesday walked out of a White House meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., after the Democrats said they wouldn’t agree to fund a border wall, suggesting talks to end the government shutdown may have blown up catastrophically.

“Just left a meeting with Chuck and Nancy, a total waste of time,” Trump tweeted. “I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!”
The meeting, which lasted only 15 minutes, was the latest attempt by Trump, Pelosi, and Schumer to reach an agreement to fund the government. The government has been partially shut down for nearly three weeks because they can’t agree on funding the border wall that Trump wants to build on the southern U.S. border.

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Schumer called Trump’s departure “somewhat unbecoming of a presidency.” Trump had become furious, according to Schumer.

“He sort of slammed the table, and when Leader Pelosi said she didn’t agree with the wall, he just walked out and said, ‘We have nothing to discuss,'” Schumer said.

Republicans disputed Schumer’s characterization of Trump’s conduct. “I don’t recall him ever raising his voice or slamming his hand,” Vice President Mike Pence told reporters later, saying Trump had walked into the session handing out candy.

Elected leaders who weaponize religion are playing a dangerous game By Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii- District 2)

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/religious-rights/424362-elected-leaders-who-weaponize-religion-are-playing-a

For too long in our country, politicians have weaponized religion for their own selfish gain, fomenting bigotry, fears and suspicions based on the faith, religion or spiritual practices of their political opponents.

Whether we think of ourselves as Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikh, Buddhists, Jews, atheists, agnostics, or anything else, it is imperative that we stand united in our commitment to protect religious freedom and the right to worship or not worship, safely and without the fear of retribution.

We must stand together, and with one voice condemn those who seek to incite bigotry based on religion. We cannot allow those who are anxious to exploit our differences to drive a wedge between us. We cannot and will not tolerate prejudicial treatment of those with whom we disagree, any more than we would tolerate such treatment of those with whom we agree.

Standing up for freedom of religion for all people is as critical now as it’s ever been–hatred and bigotry are casting a dark shadow over our political system and threatening the very fabric of our country. The heartbreaking atrocity in Pittsburgh, where 11 people were murdered while worshiping at their synagogue, is but the latest reminder of the horrible potential consequence of prejudice and bigotry. The shooting at the synagogue in Pittsburgh, the shooting at the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., the shooting at the mosque in New York and too many others to list serve as devastating and atrocious reminders of what this kind of hatred and this kind of bigotry can lead to.

While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus. If Buescher is “unqualified” because of his Catholicism and affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, then President John F. Kennedy, and the ‘liberal lion of the Senate’ Ted Kennedy would have been “unqualified” for the same reasons.
Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that there “shall be no religious test” for any seeking to serve in public office.

Yes, Trump has authority to declare national emergency for border wall By Jonathan Turley,

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/424314-yes-trump-has-authority-to-declare-national-emergency-for-border-wall

Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story once marveled, “How easily men satisfy themselves that the Constitution is exactly what they wish it to be.” If Story returned to life today, he would find these to be familiar times, as politicians and pundits have decided that the Constitution bars an action by President Trump, even when they reached the diametrically opposite conclusion on similar actions taken by President Obama during his term.

In the latest “constitutional crisis” declared on Capitol Hill, Democrats are adamant that they will not fund the signature pledge of Trump to build a border wall. In response, Trump has threatened to start construction unilaterally under his emergency powers if Congress refuses to yield to his demand for more than $5 billion. Critics turned to the Constitution and found clear authority against Trump. Representative Adam Schiff, Berkeley law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky, Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman, and many others denounced such a move as flagrantly unconstitutional.The concern is well founded even if the conclusion is not. Congress has refused the funds needed for the wall, so Trump is openly claiming the right to unilaterally order construction by declaring a national emergency. On its face, that order would undermine the core role of Congress in our system of checks and balances. I happen to agree that an emergency declaration to build the wall is unwise and unnecessary. However, the declaration is not unconstitutional. Schiff, now chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, insists that Trump “does not have the power to execute” this order because “if Harry Truman could not nationalize the steel industry during wartime, this president does not have the power to declare an emergency and build a multibillion dollar wall on the border.”