Saturday, December 24, 2016


Yesterday, Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. was ordered by Barack Obama to abstain in the vote for a resolution that condemns Israel for its West Bank settlement policy, thereby ensuring its passage. Power wrote a book on the abdication of responsibility by the U.S. in preventing genocides. Then she proceeded to help her boss abdicate his responsibility in preventing the genocide in Syria. She has now augmented that disgrace with this vote empowering terrorists at the expense of the only democracy in the Middle East and her nation's staunchest ally.

Some Twitter commentary --

Arthur Schwartz -- Barack Obama just spat in the face of Israel & sided with a bunch of terrorists. That's his legacy. He's a worthless piece of garbage.

Kurt Schlichter -- Obama is a fucking disgrace.

Groups who have stood against the Jewish people:
The Nazis.
The Obama Administration.
All consigned to the ash heap of history.

Michael Goldfarb -- Obama just tore up the rule book on his way out the door. Good…let’s gut the UN and create our own facts on the ground.

Richard Kemp -- A day of infamy in the UN Security Council: Obama stabs Israel in the back, increases likelihood of violence, reduces prospects for peace.

Philip Klein -- Obama cool with Syrian use of chemical weapons and Iran building nukes. But Jewish housing construction MUST BE STOPPED!

Khaled Abu Toameh -- Palestinian Islamic Jihad praises UN resolution, says it will pave way for isolating and boycotting Israel.

Omri Ceren -- Organization statements praising Obama admin screwing Israel at UN:
- jstreetdotorg
- Hamas
- Palestinian Islamic Jihad

neontaster -- Maybe if Israel threw more homosexuals off roofs and funded proxy attacks against American troops then Obama would be more sympathetic.

Yair Rosenberg -- If not for the United Nations, where would we be able to hear Venezuela lecture the Jewish state about upstanding moral conduct?

Katie Pavlich -- Hey Congress, it's far past time to defund the UN.

When Obama leaves office, it will be a good day. So sick of this crap.

Ben Shapiro -- On behalf of Jews who care about Israel, Mr. President, let me just say, GFY.

Sean Davis -- Obama hates Israel as much as he loves ceding control of the Middle East to Iran.

Brad Thor -- From sending the Churchill bust back, to stabbing Israel in the back - it ends as ignominiously as it began...

Victoria Coates -- Today, POTUS, John Kerry and Ambassador Power joined the long line of cowards who stood by and did nothing while a mob attacked the Jews.

Larry Elder -- Mr. Obama, it's not complicated. Palestinians lay down their arms=peace. Israelis do so=genocide. Any questions?

Benjamin Haddad -- Obama could have used his last weeks in office to finally confront Russia over Syria, and the hacking. Instead he chose to go after Israel.

Seth Mandel -- While Israel is helping the Syrians that Ambassador Power has abandoned, she votes with despots against Israel. For shame.

Today explained.

A lengthier explanation is provided by Stanley Kurtz in an essay he wrote for National Review five years ago (5/26/2011). Note this prophetic passage --

The continuing influence of Obama’s pro-Palestinian sentiments is the best way to make sense of the president’s recent tilt away from Israel. This is why supporters of Israel should fear Obama’s reelection. In 2013, with his political vulnerability a thing of the past, Obama’s pro-Palestinian sympathies would be released from hibernation, leaving Israel without support from its indispensable American defender.

A truly clarifying piece. Read it all.

Donald Trump -- As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.


Added 12/24 -- Fox News Panel (Goldberg, Hemmingway, Lane, Krauthammer) discuss Obama's disgrace.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Inconsequential Action

An appropriately scathing critique of Barack Obama's Syria policy from Leon Wieseltier of the left leaning think tank Brookings Institution, writing for the Washington Post.

It is a shameful and incontrovertible fact of our history that during the past eight years the values of rescue, assistance, protection, humanitarianism and democracy have been demoted in our foreign policy and in many instances banished altogether. The ruins of the finest traditions of American internationalism, of American leadership in a darkening world, may be found in the ruins of Aleppo.

...It would be incorrect to analyze our delinquency in Syria in the dichotomously simple terms of action and inaction. The administration creatively pioneered a third option, which it pursued not only in Syria but also in Ukraine and elsewhere: Between action and inaction, it chose inconsequential action. There is the Obama doctrine! We backed moderate Syrian rebels, but not as seriously or as generously as the immoderate Syrian rebels were backed. We sent in small numbers of special operators. The CIA ran a few programs. We acted, in sum, only in ways certain not to affect the outcome. We were strategically feckless. I suspect that the president believes that the United States has no moral right to affect an outcome in another country. I suspect that he regards such decisive action as imperialism, or at least as Iraq-like. What this means in practice is that we will not help people who deserve our help. In the spirit of respecting other societies, we will idly gaze at their destruction. How would disrespecting them be worse?

As a direct or indirect consequence of our refusal to respond forcefully to the Syrian crisis, we have beheld secular tyranny, religious tyranny, genocide, chemical warfare, barrel bombs and cluster bombs, the torture and murder of children, the displacement of 11 million people, the destabilization of Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, the ascendancy of Iran in the region, the emergence of Russia as a global power, the diminishment of the American position in the world, the refugee crisis in Europe, the resurgence of fascism in Europe and a significant new threat to the security of the United States. It is amazing how much doing nothing can do, especially when it is we who do nothing.

Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Even If...

Climate change realist Christopher Monckton (circa 2008) --

Even if temperature had risen above natural variability, the recent solar Grand Maximum may have been chiefly responsible. Even if the sun were not chiefly to blame for the past half-century’s warming, the IPCC has not demonstrated that, since CO2 occupies only one-ten-thousandth part more of the atmosphere that it did in 1750, it has contributed more than a small fraction of the warming. Even if carbon dioxide were chiefly responsible for the warming that ceased in 1998 and may not resume until 2015, the distinctive, projected fingerprint of anthropogenic “greenhouse-gas” warming is entirely absent from the observed record. Even if the fingerprint were present, computer models are long proven to be inherently incapable of providing projections of the future state of the climate that are sound enough for policymaking. Even if it were possible that the models could ever become reliable, the present paper demonstrates that it is not at all likely that the world will warm as much as the IPCC imagines. Even if the world were to warm that much, the overwhelming majority of the scientific, peer-reviewed literature does not predict that catastrophe would ensue. Even if catastrophe might ensue, even the most drastic proposals to mitigate future climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would make very little difference to the climate. Even if mitigation were likely to be effective, it would do more harm than good: already millions face starvation as the dash for biofuels takes agricultural land out of essential food production: a warning that taking precautions, “just in case”, can do untold harm unless there is a sound, scientific basis for them. Finally, even if mitigation might do more good than harm, adaptation as (and if) necessary would be far more cost-effective and less likely to be harmful.

In short, we must get the science right, or we shall get the policy wrong. If the concluding equation in this analysis (Eqn. 30) is correct, the IPCC’s estimates of climate sensitivity must have been very much exaggerated. There may, therefore, be a good reason why, contrary to the projections of the models on which the IPCC relies, temperatures have not risen for a decade and have been falling since the phase-transition in global temperature trends that occurred in late 2001. Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no “climate crisis” at all. At present, then, in policy terms there is no case for doing anything. The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.

Weather Channel founder John Coleman --

Perspective is key.  Earth has vacillated between ice ages and interglacial periods for ever. Warming and cooling is natural, not man-made.

Charles C. W. Cooke observes that the left is looking to embrace conservative principles - federalism, separation of powers, decentralization - in countering Trump.,amp.html

This is very funny. Sonny Bunch explains how James Comey cost Hillary Clinton the election --

Signs of degradation. First, getting it right. A NY Times editorial from 1987, arguing for a minimum wage of $0.00. --

The idea of using a minimum wage to overcome poverty is old, honorable - and fundamentally flawed. It's time to put this hoary debate behind us, and find a better way to improve the lives of people who work very hard for very little.

And then from 2012, mocking Mitt Romney (as Barack Obama did), for Romney's spot-on assessment of Russia as our number one geopolitical foe --

Two decades after the end of the cold war, Mitt Romney still considers Russia to be America’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe.” His comments display either a shocking lack of knowledge about international affairs or just craven politics. Either way, they are reckless and unworthy of a major presidential contender.

Democratic consultant and former Clinton advisor Paul Begala --

When President Obama mocked Romney in 2012 for saying Russia was top threat, I cheered. Obama was wrong. I was wrong. Mitt was right.

Sean Davis --

Iran is using enriched uranium it bought from Russia which obtained it from the U.S. in a deal that lined a Clinton Foundation donor's pockets.

David French --

I've been in the military and I've taught in the Ivy League. The military is far, far more ideologically diverse than the "elite" academy.

Mark Steyn on John Glenn --

John Glenn was a man of boundless courage and determination: he strapped himself in and stared not just death in the face but death in hideous and unknown ways. Yet he was also an ordinary man, who was called upon to do extraordinary things and rose to the challenge. Today we are unmanned in more than merely the sense of that Luna 2 expedition.

...John Glenn must surely have wondered, as all the astronauts weathered into geezers, how a great nation grew so impoverished in spirit.

Our heroes are old and stooped and wizened, but they are the only giants we have. Today, when we talk about Americans boldly going where no man has gone before, we mean the ladies' bathroom. Progress.

I can't get enough of these. A woman writes (in the Washington Post!) that her romantic life has been ruined by Donald Trump's election. It takes a heart of stone not to laugh at what, amazingly, is not a parody.

Jonah Goldberg's response to the preceding piece  --

This kind of thing is why the conservative/libertarian view of politics as just one part of life is healthier.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers --

Betsy DeVos actually said, "gay marriage is wrong because “children need a mother and a father to love and care for them”

Regarding Weingarten's comment, David French responded --

When truth is treated like an outrage.

And here is Hillary Clinton in 2004, agreeing with DeVos' view of marriage --

From George Will - France tries to mitigate the potential for guilty feelings among those who aborted children by censoring expressions of love and support for those with Down Syndrome.

A Muslim tells how he was taught to hate Jews. This video was initially banned by You Tube, because...reasons, but it's since been reinstated. --

Kevin Williamson --

Conservatism -- the belief that the state of your life may not be your fault, but it is your problem -- was never going to be popular.

Added 12/15 -- Andrew McCarthy scoffs at the "Russia Hacks Election" narrative.

Here’s the reality: Everyone knows the Russians meddle in our elections, just as they nefariously meddle in much else. That is why it was so reckless of Clinton to keep our nation’s most closely guarded defense secrets on a private, non-secure e-mail system. Up until November 8, Democrats told us there was no reason to be alarmed about such vulnerabilities in the face of likely Russian hacking. Now, hacking is suddenly a crisis — not because the Russians are doing anything different, but because Hillary lost.

Even if the Russians did want Trump to win, what difference, at this point, does it make? The United States is the world’s most consequential nation, so lots of countries figure they have a stake in the outcome of our elections — and some, if they have the requisite capabilities, try in various ways to influence the outcome . . . just as the Obama administration has tried to influence the outcome of Israeli elections, the Brexit referendum, and other foreign contests.

The fact that they think one side or the other would be better for them does not make it so. More to the point, unless there is evidence that the meddlers have fiddled with the vote count, who cares? Under our law, it is permissible to sway the outcome of an election based on false information — just
ask Harry Reid. What’s the Democrat-media complaint? That there was too much true information?

And Kevin Williamson laughs at the Left's obsession with Ayn Rand --

Bring up your undying love of Atlas Shrugged at the typical conservative gathering and people will smile at you and try very hard not to roll their eyes. Some people think of her novels as a kind of guilty adolescent enthusiasm now grown out-of-date, an intellectual mullet, a stage one goes through between the ages of 14 and 20. Some people use Atlas Shrugged as a totem — it had a moment at the cresting of the Tea Party phenomenon. But it is rare to meet actual adult human beings who organize their politics views (or, for pity’s sake, their lives) around Ayn Rand and her views. I don’t think National Review has a single Randian in the house; I’d be surprised if the Weekly Standard did, and if one showed up at Commentary then John Podhoretz would simply mock him out of existence.

Strangely, our progressive friends insist that the Right is entirely in thrall to the ideas of Ayn Rand. Left-leaning writers in places such as New York and Washington tend to be culturally insular — parochial, even — and many of them do not know very many conservatives. I cannot tell you how many times I have met some well-meaning lefty who tells me (thinking it is a compliment!) that I do not seem like one of those people. A young woman once insisted that, as a conservative, I simply must hate homosexuals. At the time, I was living in TriBeCa and working as a theater critic, which is not a very good gay-evasion strategy. People know what they know.

...Strange that a Randian cabal would take Donald Trump as its mascot. Trump, an incompetent casino operator and hotelier who boasted of buying political favors, is practically a Rand villain. He even has the name for it.