The Very Real Economic Costs of Birthright Citizenship By Ian Tuttle — ‘Peter and Ellie Yang,” the subjects of Benjamin Carlson’s fascinating new Rolling Stone essay, “Welcome to Maternity Hotel California,” paid $35,000 to have their second child in the United States. In 2012 Chinese state media reported 10,000 “tourist births” by Chinese couples in […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/422923/print As we’ve previously observed, the Obama jihad to fundamentally transform America’s police, spearheaded by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, proceeds from the premise that police departments are corrupt institutions, beset by a culture of racism and law-breaking. This week, after a federal appeals court’s exposé of a breathtaking prosecutorial conspiracy to deprive indicted […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/422702/birthright-citizenship-and-our-evolving-jurisdiction-andrew-c-mccarthy Rich, Professor Graglia was clearly right that the Fourteenth Amendment, far from compelling the grant of birthright citizenship, is better understood as denying it. Yet, as we’ve recently been reminded by the Supremes, being right does not always matter – after all, we’re evolving! How hard is it to imagine Justice Anthony Kennedy writing something like […]
Spain’s center-right government under Mariano Rajoy continues to pursue policies that are antagonistic towards Israel — policies that are virtually unchanged from the government of former Socialist Prime Minister of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero — policies that largely coincide with the objectives of the BDS movement.
Although Spain’s Foreign Minister has repeatedly said that the government does not support a boycott against Israel, under his watch the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID), the Foreign Ministry’s primary aid-giving agency, has continued to subsidize organizations that work to delegitimize Israel.
Between 2009 and 2011, the Zapatero government funneled more than €15 million of Spanish taxpayer funds to Palestinian and Spanish non-governmental organizations that are among the leaders in campaigns aimed at delegitimizing Israel via BDS, lawfare and other forms of demonization, according to a comprehensive analysis published by the Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor.
The Rajoy government continues to fund NGOs that are involved in anti-Israel activities.
According to the Official Gazette of the Spanish State, for example, NOVA-Centre per la Innovació Social, a Barcelona-based NGO with a history of anti-Israel activism, is slated to receive more than €200,000 in 2015… AECID awarded €200,000 in 2014 to the Catalan Association for Peace, a group that has co-organized a three-year project to “raise awareness” for the BDS movement against Israel.
“The EU calls our ambassadors in because of the construction of a few houses? When did the EU call in the Palestinian ambassadors about incitement that calls for Israel’s destruction?… They don’t tell the Palestinians that they have to make their peace with a nation-state for the Jewish people. They just give the Palestinians a nation-state.” — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
U.S. policymakers who hope that the nuclear deal will help nudge the Islamic revolutionary state into becoming a normal member of the international community seem to forget the past. Policymakers, journalists, and intelligence analysts had all predicted that the era of former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami was a sure sign of the evolution of the revolution. Khatami was replaced by the even more hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
It seems clear that despite the American political establishment’s failure to recognize that a state of war already exists between Iran and the United States, the Islamic Republic has no doubt with whom it is at war.
Iran has been at war with the “Great Satan” (USA) since the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979. Its opening move was the regime’s seizure of the American Embassy and its taking U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days in 1979-1980. Technically, the move was an internationally recognized casus belli, legitimate cause for war.
In addition, the Iranian regime’s proxy terrorist group, Hezbollah, engineered the murder of 241 U.S. soldiers, sailors, and marines in Lebanon on October 23, 1983. Iran also sponsored the truck bombing that murdered 19 US Air Force personnel at the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia on June 25, 1996, in an attack allegedly executed by a Bahrain-based cell of Hezbollah, with the cooperation of a Saudi-trained Hezbollah cell.
The U.S. Department of Justice recently argued before an Idaho federal court that a law prohibiting sleeping on the streets violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
The Justice Department’s expressed reasoning: “Sleeping is a life-sustaining activity — i.e., it must occur at some time in some place.” Hence, “If a person literally has nowhere to go, then enforcement of the anti-camping ordinance against that person criminalizes her for being homeless.”
Let’s take that reasoning to its logical extension: Another life-sustaining activity is that human beings must get rid of waste, whether by urination or defecation. Would our Justice Department also pontificate that enforcing laws against such natural human activity on city streets is unconstitutional because these laws most directly affect the homeless, who have no readily available bathroom to use?
And what about laws against fornication in public? That, too, is a natural and much-desired activity for most human beings who have reached puberty. Shall that activity also be allowed in public because a homeless couple has no home in which to make love? This is no improbable hypothetical; MSNBC pictured a husband, wife and their 18-month-old son living under the 16th Street bridge in Boise.
The new twist in the controversy surrounding the nuclear agreement is an argument over the veracity of a report on a side deal giving Iran the right to inspect its own nuclear facilities for potential violations. The idea is so preposterous that it must be true, judging by the rest of the top-secret document on which the U.S. Congress is going to vote in September.
But as the debate heats up over whether the deal furthers or hinders Iran’s nuclear weapon capabilities, an equally serious issue keeps being marginalized. This is the more immediate and tangible danger posed by Iran’s terrorist proxies, and the sudden financial and ideological boost the deal is providing them.
The reason it is crucial to keep an eye on their activities is that they constitute Iran’s global army — the boots on the ground, so to speak — who perform the legwork necessary for the ultimate aim of regional and global jihadist hegemony. Their role is to set the stage for that time in the not-so-distant future when Iran’s power and reach are so extensive that its leaders won’t need to waste their nuclear warheads by firing them.
Hillary Clinton may think those creatures making wide, gentle circles over her campaign are bluebirds of happiness, but they’re looking more and more like buzzards. They look hungry.
The news gets grimmer with every news cycle as she revises and extends everything she has said about her email machine and the classified information that may be on it. She says she can’t remember, and we can believe that much. Sir Walter Scott got it right: “O, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”
Hillary even upends the famous Washington dictum that “it’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up.” Sometimes it’s both.
We’re hearing the first hints, some of them not so subtle, that the FBI is investigating more than a security situation, defined as a simple matter of learning whether classified information leaked from the State Department when she was the secretary of State, and if so, who it was leaked to. National Public Radio, which usually feeds only the bluebirds of Democratic happiness, reports that it learned from “two lawyers familiar with the inquiry” that a formal criminal investigation is under consideration, presumably at the Justice Department, and it could happen “soon.”
Hillary might not be the first target. She can always find somebody else to throw under the bus or feed to the alligators.
When President Obama signed the Obamacare bill into law, Vice President Joe Biden said, sotto voce, “this is a big (expletive deleted) deal.” So it was. Hillary Clinton’s private email system, on which she trafficked in many of the nation’s most closely guarded secrets, is just as big.
Start with the purpose for which Mrs. Clinton established the system. It was to prevent the government — and any historians, journalists and the public — from knowing of and archiving her emails in order for her to evade accountability. The emails to firstname.lastname@example.org would only be revealed if she agreed, and whatever corruption — remember the Clinton “pay-to-play” Foundation — would never be revealed.
Mrs. Clinton still says she never sent or received classified information on her private nongovernment email system. That more than 300 emails with highly classified information are now identified bothers her not at all.
“This book is about the new forms taken by Jewish apostasy in an age when Jewish existence is threatened more starkly and immediately than at any time since the Nazi war against the Jews.”
Thus begins professor emeritus Edward Alexander’s latest work, “Jews Against Themselves” (Transaction Publishers). Published last month, the book is comprised of 18 essays penned over the last 30 years with titles like “Noam Chomsky and Holocaust Denial,” “Michael Lerner: Hillary Clinton’s Jewish Rasputin,” and “Choose Your Side: The New York Times or Judaism.”
Before his retirement in 2004, Alexander taught English at the University of Washington. His previous works include “The Jewish Idea and Its Enemies,” “Irving Howe: Socialist, Critic, Jew,” and “The Holocaust and the War of Ideas.”
The Jewish Press: Why do you think so many Jews continue to support the Democratic Party and President Obama when it is almost undeniable that the Republican Party is far more pro-Israel?
Alexander: That’s a very tough question. It’s at least a decade since Gabriel Schoenfeld demonstrated in his book The Return of Anti-Semitism the extent to which blatant anti-Semitism had found a home within the Democratic Party. But Jewish voters have continued in their old habits nevertheless.
At the national conventions of the Democratic Party, the only thing that gets more cheers from the crowd than abortion without limits and other forms of forbidden fruit is hostility to Israel. Again, this has raised no alarm bells for the majority of Jewish voters. Jewish life in America is worm-eaten with a debased liberalism unequalled even in Great Britain.
Can you elaborate?
One of the main reasons – perhaps the main reason – David Cameron won an unexpected victory in the recent British election is that British Jews in marginal districts turned massively against their beloved Labor Party due to its fanatical Israelophobia.