Herman Cain Has Died

I met Herman Cain at CPAC in 2011, when he was running for president.

Rest in peace, brother.

Breaking: Former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain has died after battling the coronavirus. He was 74. https://t.co/n24bA497Cs

— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) July 30, 2020

Martha McSally Concedes

This is just wow.

I mean, remember this post from 2010? "Kyrsten Sinema, Bisexual Israel-Hating Antiwar Radical, is Face of Today's Democrat Party."

Well, Ms. Sinema goes back to Washington as the new (junior?) senator from Arizona.

Just wow, man.

At the Arizona Republic, "Kyrsten Sinema defeats Martha McSally; will be first woman from Arizona in U.S. Senate," and at ABC News 15 Phoenix:

Democratic Socialism Rising

I'm glad.

This is a positive development, for leftists can't hide behind the "not really socialism" lie anymore. We can call them as well see them. Hateful, murderous Marxists.

At AP, "Democratic socialism rising in the age of Trump":

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — A week ago, Maine Democrat Zak Ringelstein wasn’t quite ready to consider himself a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, even if he appreciated the organization’s values and endorsement in his bid to become a U.S. senator.

Three days later, he told The Associated Press it was time to join up. He’s now the only major-party Senate candidate in the nation to be a dues-paying democratic socialist.

Ringelstein’s leap is the latest evidence of a nationwide surge in the strength and popularity of an organization that, until recently, operated on the fringes of the liberal movement’s farthest left flank. As Donald Trump’s presidency stretches into its second year, democratic socialism has become a significant force in Democratic politics. Its rise comes as Democrats debate whether moving too far left will turn off voters.

“I stand with the democratic socialists, and I have decided to become a dues-paying member,” Ringelstein told AP. “It’s time to do what’s right, even if it’s not easy.”

There are 42 people running for offices at the federal, state and local levels this year with the formal endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America, the organization says. They span 20 states, including Florida, Hawaii, Kansas and Michigan.

The most ambitious Democrats in Washington have been reluctant to embrace the label, even as they embrace the policies defining modern-day democratic socialism: Medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, free college tuition and the abolition of the federal department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Congress’ only self-identified democratic socialist, campaigned Friday with the movement’s newest star, New York City congressional candidate Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old former bartender who defeated one of the most powerful House Democrats last month.

Her victory fed a flame that was already beginning to burn brighter. The DSA’s paid membership has hovered around 6,000 in the years before Trump’s election, said Allie Cohn, a member of the group’s national political team.

Last week, its paid membership hit 45,000 nationwide.

There is little distinction made between the terms “democratic socialism” and “socialism” in the group’s literature. While Ringelstein and other DSA-backed candidates promote a “big-tent” philosophy, the group’s constitution describes its members as socialists who “reject an economic order based on private profit” and “share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality and non-oppressive relationships.”

These are bad people. Very bad.

Keep reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "'I believe that in a modern, moral and wealthy society, no person in America should be too poor to live...' (VIDEO)."

'I believe that in a modern, moral and wealthy society, no person in America should be too poor to live...' (VIDEO)

This is apparently Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's canned line on what it means to be a democratic socialist. At WaPo, "'No person in America should be too poor to live': Ocasio-Cortez explains democratic socialism to Colbert."

She came up with the same line on the View, when asked by Meghan McCain. See Free Beacon, "Self-Described Democratic Socialist Ocasio-Cortez Struggles to Differentiate Between Socialism, Democratic Socialism."



She's just trying to make her socialism palatable, even for the so-called working class voters in her district, many of whom probably do wake up every morning saying they're "capitalists."

Here's the page for the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) at Discover the Networks:

At the height of the Cold War and the Vietnam War era, the Socialist Party USA of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas split in two over the issue of whether or not to criticize the Soviet Union, its allies, and Communism: One faction rejected and denounced the USSR and its allies—including Castro's Cuba, the Sandinistas, North Vietnam and the Viet Cong—and supported Poland's Solidarity Movement, etc.  This anti-Communist faction took the name Social Democrats USA. (Many of its leaders—including Carl Gershman, who became Jeane Kirkpatrick's counselor of embassy at the United Nations—eventually grew more conservative and became Reagan Democrats.) The other faction, however, refused to reject Marxism, refused to criticize or denounce the USSR and its allies, and continued to support Soviet-backed policies—including the nuclear-freeze program that sought to consolidate Soviet nuclear superiority in Europe. This faction, whose leading figure was Michael Harrington, in 1973 took the name Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC); its membership included many former Students for a Democratic Society activists.

DSOC operated not as a separate political party but as an explicitly socialist force within the Democratic Party and the labor movement. As such, it attracted many young activists who sought to push the Democratic Party further leftward politically. Among the notables who joined DSOC were Machinists' Union leader William Winpisinger, feminist Gloria Steinem, gay rights activist Harry Britt, actor Ed Asner, and California Congressman (and avowed socialist) Ron Dellums.

By 1979 DSOC had made major inroads into the Democratic Party and claimed a national membership of some 3,000 people. In 1983 DSOC, under Michael Harrington's leadership, merged with the New American Movement to form the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Harrington’s strategy was to force a “realignment” of the two major political parties by pulling the Democrats emphatically to the left and polarizing the parties along class lines. He expected that this would drive business interests away from the Democrats and into the Republican Party, but that those losses would be more than offset by an influx of newly energized minority and union voters to the Democratic Party, and that over time the Democrats would embrace socialism as their preferred ideology.[1] Thus Harrington sought to establish DSA as a force that worked within, and not outside of, the existing American political system. Following Harrington's lead, most DSAers were committed to electoral politics within the Democratic Party.[2] They feared that if they were to openly move too far and too quickly to the left, they would run the risk of alienating moderate Democrats and thereby ensuring Ronald Reagan's reelection in 1984.[3]

Early in DSA's history, political organizer Harry Boyte, convinced that even Michael Harrington’s non-revolutionary form of socialism would be rejected by most Americans, formed a “communitarian caucus” within DSA. As author Stanley Kurtz explains:

“The communitarians wanted to use the language and ethos of traditional American communities—including religious language—to promote a 'populist' version of socialism. Portraying heartless corporations as enemies of traditional communities, thought Boyte, was the only way to build a quasi-socialist mass movement in the United States. Socialists could quietly help direct such a movement, Boyte believed, but openly highlighting socialist ideology would only drive converts away. In effect, Boyte was calling on DSA to drop its public professions of socialism and start referring to itself as 'communitarian' instead.”[4]
But DSA rejected this approach, worried that if it failed to publicly articulate its socialist ideals, genuine socialism itself would eventually wither and die. Boyte’s opponents stated: “We can call ourselves ‘communitarians,’ but the word will get out. Better to be out of the closet; humble, yet proud.”[5]

DSA helped establish the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) in 1991 and continues to work closely with the latter to this day. Virtually every CPC member also belongs to DSA.

In 1998, WorldNetDaily (WND) published a two-part series of articles titled “Congress’ Red Army Caucus” (here and here), which exposed the close association between DSA and CPC. At that time, DSA hosted the CPC website. Shortly after the WND revelations, CPC established its own website under the auspices of Congress. Meanwhile, DSA scrubbed its own website to remove evidence of its ties to CPC. Among the items removed from the site were the lyrics to such songs as the following:

* “The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of Communism and socialism

* “Red Revolution,” sung to the tune of “Red Robin” (This song includes such lyrics as: “When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng.…”)

* “Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?” (The lyrics of this song include: “Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.”)

In 2000, DSA endorsed Pay Equity Now!—a petition jointly issued in 2000 by the National Organization for Women, the Philadelphia Coalition of Labor Union Women, and the International Wages for Housework Campaign. Together these organizations charged that “the U.S. government opposes pay equity—equal pay for work of equal value—in national policy and international agreements”; that “women are often segregated in caring and service work for low pay, much like the housework they are expected to do for no pay at home”; and that “underpaying women is a massive subsidy to employers that is both sexist and racist.”

In 2001, DSA characterized the 9/11 terror attacks as acts of retaliation for transgressions and injustices that America had previously perpetrated across the globe. “We live in a world,” said DSA, “organized so that the greatest benefits go to a small fraction of the world’s population while the vast majority experiences injustice, poverty, and often hopelessness. Only by eliminating the political, social, and economic conditions that lead people to these small extremist groups can we be truly secure.”

Strongly opposed to the U.S. war on terror and America's post-9/11 military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq, DSA is a member organization of the United For Peace and Justice anti-war coalition.

DSA was a Co-sponsoring Organization of the April 25, 2004 “March for Women’s Lives” held in Washington, D.C., a rally that drew more than a million demonstrators advocating for the right to unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

In 2007, DSA National Political Committee member David Green expressed support for the Employee Free Choice Act as a measure that could “limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace”; “minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists”; and “provid[e] an excellent organizing tool (i.e., tactic) through which we can pursue our socialist strategy while simultaneously engaging the broader electorate on an issue of economic populism.”

In 2008, most DSA members actively supported Barack Obama for U.S. President. Saidthe organization: “DSA believes that the possible election of Senator Obama to the presidency in November represents a potential opening for social and labor movements to generate the critical political momentum necessary to implement a progressive political agenda.”

In October 2009, the Socialist Party of America announced that at least 70 Congressional Democrats were members of its Caucus at that time—i.e., members of DSA. Most of those individuals belonged to the Congressional Progressive Caucus and/or the Congressional Black Caucus. To view a list of their names, click here.

In the fall of 2011, DSA was a strong backer of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Said DSA:

"The Occupy Wall Street protests have invigorated the American Left in a way not seen in decades … So we have urged our members to take an active, supportive role in their local occupations, something many DSAers had already begun doing as individuals, because they believe that everyday people, the 99%, shouldn’t be made to pay for a crisis set off by an out-of-control financial sector and the ethically compromised politicians who have failed to rein it in."

On October 8, 2011, DSA co-sponsored a Midwest Regional March for Peace and Justice, a protest demonstration commemorating the tenth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
 Click here for a list of additional co-sponsors.

DSA members today seek to build “progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.” “We are socialists," reads the organization's boilerplate, "because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.” "To achieve a more just society," adds DSA, “many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed.” A major hallmark of such transformation would be an “equitable distribution of resources.”

DSA summarizes its philosophy as follows: "Today … [r]esources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them. Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives."

True to its roots, DSA seeks to increase its political influence not by establishing its own political party but rather by working closely with the Democratic Party to promote leftist agendas. "Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious, and community organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party," says DSA. "We work with those movements to strengthen the party’s left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.... Maybe sometime in the future ... an alternative national party will be viable. For now, we will continue to support progressives who have a real chance at winning elections, which usually means left-wing Democrats."

In a document titled “Where We Stand,” DSA outlines in detail its political perspectives. Key excerpts from this document include the following:

“Nearly three decades after the 'War on Poverty' was declared and then quickly abandoned, one-fifth of our society subsists in poverty, living in substandard housing, attending underfunded, overcrowded schools, and receiving inadequate health care.”

“In the global capitalist economy, these injustices are magnified a thousand fold. The poorest third of humanity earns two percent of the world's income, while the richest fifth receives two-thirds of global income.”

“We are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.”

“We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships.”

“A democratic socialist politics for the 21st century must promote an international solidarity dedicated to raising living standards across the globe, rather than 'leveling down' in the name of maximizing profits and economic efficiency.”

“Equality, solidarity, and democracy can only be achieved through international political and social cooperation aimed at ensuring that economic institutions benefit all people.”

“Democratic socialists are dedicated to building truly international social movements—of unionists, environmentalists, feminists, and people of color—that together can elevate global justice over brutalizing global competition.”

“To be genuinely multiracial, a socialist movement must respect the particular goals of African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and other communities of color. It must place a high priority on economic justice to eradicate the sources of inequality; on affirmative action and other compensatory programs to overcome ongoing discrimination and the legacy of inequality; and on social justice to change the behavior, attitudes, and ideas that foster racism.”

“Free markets or private charity cannot provide adequate public goods and services.”

“The capitalist market economy not only suppresses global living standards, but also means chronic underfunding of socially necessary public goods,from research and development to preventive health care and job training.”

“U.S. dominance of the global economy is buttressed by its political power and military might. Indeed, the United States is engaged in a long-term policy of imperial overreach in a period in which global instability will probably increase.”

“Fifty years of world leadership have taken their toll on the U.S. The links among heavy military spending, fiscal imbalance, and a weakening economy are too clear to ignore. Domestically, the United States faces social and structural economic problems of a magnitude unknown to other advanced capitalist states. The resources needed to sustain U.S. dominance are a drain on the national economy, particularly the most neglected and underdeveloped sectors. Nowhere is a struggle against militarism more pressing than in the United States, where the military budget bleeds the public sector of much needed funds for social programs.”

“As inequalities of wealth and income increase and the wages and living standards of most are either stagnant or falling, social needs expand. Only a revitalized public sector can universally and democratically meet those needs.”

“Social redistribution—the shift of wealth and resources from the rich to the rest of society—will require: massive redistribution of income from corporations and the wealthy to wage earners and the poor and the public sector, in order to provide the main source of new funds for social programs, income maintenance and infrastructure rehabilitation, and a massive shift of public resources from the military (the main user of existing discretionary funds) to civilian uses.”

“Over time, income redistribution and social programs will be critical not only to the poor but to the great majority of working people. The defense and expansion of government programs that promote social justice, equal education for all children, universal health care, environmental protection and guaranteed minimum income and social well-being is critical for the next Left.”

“The fundamental task of democratic socialists is to build anti-corporate social movements capable of winning reforms that empower people. Since such social movements seek to influence state policy, they will intervene in electoral politics, whether through Democratic primaries, non-partisan local elections, or third party efforts.”

“Electoral tactics are only a means for democratic socialists; the building of a powerful anti-corporate coalition is the end.”

'The Only Good Democratic Socialist is a Dead One...'

So, Huffington Post is not pleased with the fever swamp response to their Ocasio-Cortez boosting.

See, "Our Hate Mail." (On Twitter too.)

Here's the piece to which the hate mail responds, "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Will Be the Leading Democrat on Climate Change."

Look, I don't care for the hate mail, but I do love how this woman's campaign is clarifying the political choices between the two major parties. Under Obama we had stealth socialism. Since Bernie's primary campaign in 2016, we've had Democrats campaigning as democratic socialists out in the open.

That's really a good development in American politics. I appreciate Ocasio-Cortez, a lot.

Expect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Be Among the Most Fanatical Israel-Bashers in Congress

This post assumes that Ocasio-Cortez wins her general election contest in November. New York's 14th congressional district is heavily progressive with minority-majority demographics. I haven't seen any serious commentary so far suggesting her Republican opponent, Anthony Pappas, is likely to win. As the New York Post reported, "Pappas’ bid is a long shot. Democrats outnumber Republicans in the district by roughly 6-1, voter registration records show."

Okay, should Ocasio-Cortez take her seat in Congress next year, it's also safe to assume she's be one of the most fervently anti-Israel Democrats in the House.

I haven't seen the major newspapers, such as the New York Times, for example, pick up on this aspect of the Ocasio-Cortez story, but it's a big one. It's not just that the Democrats are openly embracing a Marxist ideological program, but also that virulent anti-Israel ideology has bubbled up into the mainstream. This is of course not new to conservative bloggers and top Twitter personalities, but a focus on Ocasio-Cortez's public comments will put the Democrats' oft-hidden anti-Israel animus in the spotlight.

Here's a roundup of commentary from conservative blogs and pro-Jewish outlets.

First is the big story from the other day, at the Daily Caller, "Socialist Darling Caught Celebrating, Campaigning With Known Anti-Semite and Racist":

Socialist Darling Caught Celebrating, Campaigning With Known Anti-Semite And Racist https://t.co/nB3lS47qRS pic.twitter.com/KfR0BYShOV

— The Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) June 27, 2018

Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stunned the political world and rank-in-file Democrats by defeating incumbent Joe Crowley in Tuesday’s New York primary. The Ocasio-Cortez win signaled the growing swing leftward for national Democrats, a party undergoing a power struggle and identity crisis after Trump’s election victory in 2016. The platform Ocasio-Cortez ran on was deeply progressive, calling on the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, nationalized health care, universal jobs guarantee and getting America to 100 percent green energy.

However, footage reveals that Ocasio-Cortez also has associates with regressive views.

One of Ocasio-Cortez’s most enthusiastic campaigners and a man who stood behind her at her victory party, Thomas Lopez-Pierre, is a known anti-Semite and racist. Lopez-Pierre has regularly used slurs against Jewish and black New Yorkers in public forums and while running for office himself.

While running for office in 2017, Lopez-Pierre specifically campaigned on “protecting tenants from greedy Jewish landlords.” Lopez-Pierre’s own campaign website shows his rantings agains “Greedy Jewish Landlords.” His campaign website applauds the arrest of “Greedy Jewish Landlords” and says that “Jewish Landlords” are “punishing” black and Hispanic families...

More.

(Ocasio-Perez issued a repudiation of Lopez-Pierre, claiming she has "No idea who this guy is...")

Okay, then, let's go to Joel Pollak, at Breitbart, "Pollak: New Democrat Heroine Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is an Anti-Israel Radical":

Again. As hysterical #NeverTrumper Jewish commentators attack the most pro-Israel president in history, their new party elects another Hamas supporter.
I dare you to attack this bigot and
her Jew hating voters on MSNBC. https://t.co/i1fveOl9GT

— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) June 27, 2018

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 28-year-old democratic socialist who became an instant Democratic Party heroine by unseating party caucus chair Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) in Tuesday’s New York primary, is an anti-Israel radical.

Her victory is a further sign of the Democratic Party’s slide toward the extreme left — and toward the anti-Israel left in particular.

During her primary election, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted passionately about an alleged Israeli “massacre” of Palestinian “protesters” at the Gaza border, citing an Al Jazeera article.

Click the link to see anti-Israel tweets from Ocasio Cortez. Pollak continues:

The Jewish radicals of J Street will, no doubt, be thrilled to have another member of Congress who supports Hamas over Israel, and will rush to her defense. But for the few Democrats who still support Israel, her victory is worrying.

Ocasio-Cortez’s anti-Israel views are of a piece with her radical policies in general — such as government health care for all, free college tuition, guaranteed federal jobs, and abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). (At least she is consistent: she does not believe in a border fence with Gaza or a border wall with Mexico.) Her campaign even adopted the zombie-like “mic check” first seen at radical Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011.

Ocasio-Cortez’s anti-Israel views, like her other socialist policies, are ill-informed and would have devastating consequences if enacted. She is not stupid: far from it, the Boston University graduate is whip-smart. But like other far-left millennials, she has mastered the finer details of a fictional universe.

These are positions she will not easily walk back. Her victory has thrilled the Democratic base, but it spells trouble for the party, and for the country.

Now, check out Pamela Geller, "New York's New Socialist Candidate, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Tweets: Israel Guilty of 'Massacre' of 'Palestinians'":

New York’s New Socialist Candidate, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Tweets: Israel Guilty of ‘Massacre’ of ‘Palestinians’: New York's new socialist candidate for Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, just sent out a tweet that condemned Israel for its supposed… https://t.co/EfEAVUXNY4

— Pamela Geller (@PamelaGeller) June 29, 2018

And at the Forward, "What It Means For Israel If Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is Democrats’ Future":

What It Means For Israel If Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is Democrats’ Future https://t.co/JmVofz5NYm

— The Forward (@jdforward) June 27, 2018

Prominent progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders and activist Linda Sarsour are vying with each other to laud Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who notched a David-and-Goliath upset victory over 10-term Rep. Joe Crowley in Tuesday’s Democratic primary in New York.

Her victory — with 57% of the vote — raises larger questions about the party’s direction, including whether she won despite or because of her stinging comments about Israel on the campaign trail. Could her upset win be another sign that Democratic voters want the party to be more critical of the Jewish state?

“We’re seeing a pattern where the activist core of the Democratic Party is becoming highly critical of Israel almost as a default position,” Brooklyn College history professor KC Johnson, who has written about this shift, told the Forward on Wednesday.

Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign in a fast-changing Queens district was almost solely focused on domestic causes like “Medicare-for-All” and abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Her campaign website doesn’t mention anything about foreign affairs on its issues page.

But she did attract attention in May for calling the Israeli army’s killing of Palestinian protesters in Gaza a “massacre.”

More.

Also at the Times of Israel, "Progressive Democrat who upset NY incumbent accused Israel of ‘massacre’ in Gaza."

Progressive Democrat who upset NY incumbent accused Israel of ‘massacre’ in Gaza https://t.co/kCPrgpCk7t pic.twitter.com/2ye5WfDWYh

— The Times of Israel (@TimesofIsrael) June 27, 2018

And the Jerusalem Post, "WHAT DOES SURPRISE NYC PRIMARY RACE WINNER THINK ABOUT ISRAEL? 'This is a massacre', Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter of the IDF's killing of Palestinians at the Gaza border in May. 'Democrats can’t be silent about this anymore'."

Pro-Palestinian Bernie Sanders protege wins upset in NYC primary race https://t.co/VzImPGAk14 pic.twitter.com/0IN2R3oexW

— JPost Politics (@jpost_politics) June 27, 2018

And at Algemeiner, "Democratic Socialist Who Upset NY Rep. Joe Crowley Said Israel Committed a ‘Massacre’ in Gaza":

Democratic Socialist Who Upset NY Rep. Joe Crowley Said Israel Committed a ‘Massacre’ in Gaza https://t.co/3ySdgSq249 via @Algemeiner pic.twitter.com/CiVp3OzDxd

— Israel News Links (@IsraelNewsLinks) June 28, 2018

As noted, this radical anti-Israel sentiment isn't new. Back in 2012 I wrote about Democrat Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema, who's now the frontrunner to replace retiring Republican Senator Jeff Flake in the upper chamber.

See my entry from six years ago. The more thing change, the more they stay the same: "Kyrsten Sinema, Bisexual Israel-Hating Antiwar Radical, is Face of Today's Democrat Party."

More later..

Let's Remember Just How Bad the Obama Presidency Was

Well, how can anyone forget? Heh.

At Post-Libertarian, "The Obama Presidency Was Bad":

We’re already caught up in how terrible the Trump presidency is, but over the next four years, it will be important to remember just how bad the Obama presidency was. When overcome with frustration at the current administration, I would urge readers to come back to this post and remember that the last president was also quite terrible. In his farewell speech, Obama tried to make the argument for his presidency’s accomplishments, but many of them were simply court cases that were decided while he was president, or decisions that were nice but had little real policy impact.

There have been plenty of reflections on the Obama presidency, but I think a high level overview of everything Obama did would put in perspective just how awful he’s been, especially as we experience the incompetency and horrible policy decisions of the current administration. I’ve done this by letter grades A through F.

Actually, I'm quite enjoying the current administration, thank you.

But keep reading.

Socialite Jill Kelley Opens Up About David Petraeus Scandal (VIDEO)

Wild.

Via Fox News.



Previous Petraeus scandal blogging here.

Breitbart Senior Editor Joel Pollak Told Staffers to Stop Defending Michelle Fields (VIDEO)

When I first started checking out this story, I tweeted, "Video or it didn't happen."

I still haven't seen what you'd call "conclusive" video evidence that Fields was assaulted --- and there's been all kinds of conflicting reports claiming to have such evidence, although nothing I've seen is definitive either way.

Sadly, Ms. Fields doesn't come off as a persuasive victim. She appears "clingy" and "whiny." In other words, she's not a sympathetic individual, especially considering the hateful "purity" wars we're having right now over Ted Cruz vs. Donald Trump.

I haven't been on Twitter that much lately. It's been too ugly.

In any case, see BuzzFeed, "Breitbart Editor Ordered Staffers to Stop Defending Michelle Fields." (Via Memeorandum.)

Pollack ordered:

“EVERYONE. STOP tweeting about the story. Stop speculating about the story. Stop answering queries about the story. Stop retweeting other people's comments about the story. You were given explicit instructions. If you have new information please DM me.”

Plus, watch Ms. Fields' interview with Megyn Kelly on Fox News from a couple of nights ago, "Trump campaign manager accused of assaulting reporter."

Sharyl Attkisson: White House Hiding Photos of Obama on Night of #Benghazi Attack

A great segment, from December (via DC Clothesline).



And buy her book, Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington.

Capital Punishment's Decline

Well, thanks to the "evolving standards of decency."

At LAT, "Capital punishment in U.S. continues its decline":

The death penalty continued its slow and steady two-decade decline this year, as fewer convicted murderers were sentenced to die and most executions were limited to just three states, according to a report to be released Thursday.

The number of new death sentences plummeted from 315 in 1996 to 72 as of Wednesday, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

The number of executions carried out has fallen sharply as well. This year, 35 convicts were put to death, compared with 98 in 1999. And whereas 20 states were carrying out executions in the 1990s, only seven did so this year.

"The relevancy of the death penalty in our criminal justice system is seriously in question when 43 out of the 50 states do not apply the ultimate sanction," said Richard Dieter, the center's executive director.

Most of the executions took place in Texas (10), Missouri (10) and Florida (8). The other states to carry out executions were Oklahoma (3), Georgia (2), Arizona (1) and Ohio (1).

Even in Texas, the number of new death sentences has fallen sharply, from 48 per year in the late 1990s to fewer than a dozen per year recently.

Experts say the trend reflects a steep drop in violent crime, a growing use of "life without parole" sentences for convicted killers and a skepticism over the death penalty itself...

Well, we'll be just like the rest of the "civilized world" in no time!

More.

Is the Boycott Movement Anti-Semitic?

Indeed it is, argues Professor Cary Nelson, at Inside Higher Ed.

Why Pamela Geller's Hate Speech Should Be Barred — But BDS Allowed http://t.co/ZZ3r0UDheE via @jdforward
— W. James Casper (@repsac3) April 14, 2013

BONUS: From Jonathan Marks, at Commentary, "“Scholarship and Politics Don’t Mix!” Say Those Who Mix Scholarship and Politics."

U.S. Spy Agencies Heard #Benghazi Attackers Using State Department Phones to Call Their Commanders During the Attack

This is interesting. Freaky even.

From Bryan Preston, at Pajamas Media.

Obama to Force Government Contractors to Reveal Salary Breakdowns by Sex and Race in Equal Pay Drive

Well, it's not like Dear Leader's diktats are a surprise anymore or anything.

A Blazing Cat Fur.

Strange though, notes Instapundit, "Once you impose the ‘ceteris paribus’ condition, the alleged 23% gender pay gap starts to quickly evaporate."

Well, O' Great One! prolly didn't do so well in economics, although we'll never know with those Columbia academic transcripts nailed down tighter than the gold at New York's Federal Reserve Bank, lol.

Volkswagen Workers Reject UAW in Devastating Defeat for Organized Labor

This is just too f-king bad.

Like I said after Wisconsin's defeat of the Scott Walker recall, labor troubles signal the death of organized progressivism. The left's socialist agenda keep clawing its way back from the grave, but at the most basic level --- the economic class struggle --- communist progressivism is dead, the assholes.

At Instapundit, "CHANGE: United Auto Workers Union Stunned by Devastating Defeat in Tennessee":

“Workers at a Volkswagen factory in Tennessee have voted against union representation, a devastating loss that derails the United Auto Workers union’s effort to organize Southern factories.” Judging by twitter, the UAW thought they had this one in the bag, which isn’t surprising given that VW wasn’t fighting them. They underestimated how toxic their brand has become.

Or maybe it was this: “The rejection of a key Democratic Party ally occurred despite President Barack Obama’s personal support for the unionization drive.” Speaking of toxic brands...

Also at WSJ, "Union Suffers Big Loss at Tennessee VW Plant: Volkswagen Workers Rejected the UAW by a Vote of 712 to 626":

The United Auto Workers union suffered a crushing defeat Friday, falling short in an election in which it seemed to have a clear path to organizing workers at Volkswagen AG VOW3.XE +1.10%  's plant in Chattanooga, Tenn.

The setback is a bitter defeat because the union had the cooperation of Volkswagen management and the aid of Germany's powerful IG Metall union, yet it failed to win a majority among the plants 1,550 hourly workers.

Volkswagen workers rejected the union by a vote of 712 to 626. The defeat raises questions about the future of a union that for years has suffered from declining membership and influence, and almost certainly leaves its president, Bob King, who had vowed to organize at least one foreign auto maker by the time he retires in June, with a tarnished legacy.

"If the union can't win [in Chattanooga], it can't win anywhere," said Steve Silvia, a economics and trade professor at American University who has studied labor unions.

The UAW said that "outside interference" affected the outcome of the vote. "Unfortunately, politically motivated third parties threatened the economic future of this facility and the opportunity for workers to create a successful operating model that that would grow jobs in Tennessee," Gary Casteel, the union official in charge of the VW campaign, said in a statement.

Under an agreement the UAW has with Volkswagen, it now must cease all organizing efforts aimed at the Chattanooga plant for at least a year.

A win would have marked the first time the union has been able to organize a foreign-owned auto plant in a Southern U.S. state, and would have been particularly meaningful, because the vote was set in a right-to-work state in the South, where antiunion sentiment is strong and all past UAW organizing drives at automobile plants have failed.

The Chattanooga workers had been courted steadily for nearly two years by both the UAW and the IG Metall union, which pushed Volkswagen management to open talks with the UAW and to refrain from trying to dissuade American workers from union representation.

Mr. King made forging alliances with overseas unions the centerpiece of his strategy after he was elected in 2010. The union now must come up with a way to halt its decline. It once represented 1.5 million workers, but now has about 400,000, and diminished influence, as a result of years of downsizing, layoffs and cutbacks by the three Detroit auto makers General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. F +1.06%  and Chrysler Group.

"The union needs new members. They have to organize the transplants or they don't have much of a future," said Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich.

The election was also extraordinary because Volkswagen choose to cooperate closely with the UAW. Volkswagen allowed UAW organizers to campaign inside the factory—a step rarely seen in this or other industries.

"This is like an alternate universe where everything is turned upside down," said Cliff Hammond, a labor lawyer at Nemeth Law PC in Detroit, who represents management clients but previously worked at the Service Employees International Union. "Usually, companies fight" union drives, he added.

Left-Wing Whackjobs Prove Tom Perkins' Point

At the Wall Street Journal, "Perkinsnacht: Liberal vituperation makes our letter writer's point":

Five days on, the commentariat continues to drop anvils on Tom Perkins, who may have written the most-read letter to the editor in the history of The Wall Street Journal. The irony is that the vituperation is making our friend's point about liberal intolerance—maybe better than he did.

"I perceive a rising tide of hatred of the successful one percent," wrote the legendary venture capitalist and a founder of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Mr. Perkins called it "a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendant 'progressive' radicalism unthinkable now?"

That comparison was unfortunate, albeit provocative. It's not always easy to be subtle in 186 words, as Mr. Perkins learned, though a useful rule of thumb is not to liken anything to Nazi Germany unless it happens to be the Stalinist Soviet Union. Amid the ongoing media furor and an ungallant rebuke from Kleiner Perkins, Mr. Perkins has apologized for the comparison, without repudiating his larger argument.

While claiming to be outraged at the Nazi reference, the critics seem more incensed that Mr. Perkins dared to question the politics of economic class warfare. The boys at Bloomberg View—we read them since no one else does—devoted an entire editorial to inequality and Mr. Perkins's "unhinged Nazi rant." Others denounced him for defending his former wife Danielle Steel, and even for owning too many Rolex watches.

Maybe the critics are afraid that Mr. Perkins is onto something about the left's political method. Consider the recent record of liberals in power. They're the ones obsessed with the Koch brothers and other billionaires contributing to conservative causes, siccing journalists to trash them and federal agencies to shut them down.More at the link.

Keep reading.

The Nazi comparison was indeed over the top. But as WSJ points out, the left's attack on the rich is indeed unhinged, demonstrated by the meltdown over Perkins.

Neo-Neocon had a nice post on this the other day, "The war on the 1% and the war on the opposition":

Does this mean Kristallnacht and then the camps are coming? I happen to think what’s happening today will take a different form, a form it is already showing: continuing legal persecution and rhetorical demonization of those who dare to question the liberal line, minus the death camps and the rest. But I also believe that, if killing people ends up being necessary for some reason, the hard left here would have absolutely no hesitation in doing so. I just think, as I’ve written before, that this movement in the US has the earmarks of Chavez more than Hitler or Stalin. That could change.

As I've said many times, leftists would kill you if they had the chance. Kristallnacht is over the top. I just don't go for Nazi analogies, because they demeans the enormity of the Holocaust. That's not to say that the left isn't composed of a similar evil. It is. We've witnessed leftist evil first hand for some time now. But this is America in the 21st century. Things won't play out as they did in the 1930s. Or at least not yet. Not yet. Good people will not surrender decency to the regressive mobs.

PREVIOUSLY: "Barack's Pogrom: The Rising Tide of Hatred Against the 'Evil' One Percent."

Hillary Clinton: My Biggest Regret Is What Happened In Benghazi...'

In 2008 I had a lot of respect for Hillary Clinton, particularly with respect to Barack Obama (who I wanted to lose). But this last four years was a revelation on this woman's politics, and especially Hillary's politics of "what difference does it make?"

CNN has the video on her Benghazi comments today, "Former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton speaks at NADA."

And at Memeorandum, "Clinton's biggest regret at State: Benghazi."

And from Gateway Pundit, "What Difference Does It Make?… Hillary Says Biggest Regret “Is What Happened in Benghazi”."

Barack's Pogrom: The Rising Tide of Hatred Against the 'Evil' One Percent

You gotta read this letter at WSJ, from Tom Perkins, "Progressive Kristallnacht Coming?" (at Memeorandum):

From the Occupy movement to the demonization of the rich embedded in virtually every word of our local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, I perceive a rising tide of hatred of the successful one percent. There is outraged public reaction to the Google buses carrying technology workers from the city to the peninsula high-tech companies which employ them. We have outrage over the rising real-estate prices which these "techno geeks" can pay....

This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendent "progressive" radicalism unthinkable now?

Actually, Kristallnacht is a pretty good analogy. I wrote about the emerging evil in the Bay Area day before yesterday, "Unhinged Leftists Escalate 'Google Bus' Protests to Home of Driverless Car Designer Anthony Levandowski." You're likely to get hurt with people like this, if not killed. They went to the guy's house and knocked on his door! And this Levandowski guy's probably Jewish!

And here's yesterday's front-page story at the Los Angeles Times, "Tech industry in San Francisco addresses backlash":

With the cost of living here at levels that almost no one but the most affluent can afford, protesters have taken to the streets to block luxury shuttles ferrying tech workers to Silicon Valley companies.

In an incident signaling growing tensions, a protester hurled a rock through the window of a Google bus in Oakland in December. On Wednesday, demonstrators stood outside the Berkeley home of a Google engineer, protesting the company's work on military robots and the tech industry's role in driving up rents and evictions in San Francisco.

See all the responses at Memeorandum.

Here's idiot Steve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog, "Look, I'm not sure about tactics like slashing Google buses' tires, but if Perkins is going to have the bad taste to equate his fellow richies with the victims of the Holocaust, tell me: Who's the Hitler in all this? Where's the state power?"

Actually, look no farther than the White House for your state leader. Herr Barack has been exhorting his progressive Brownshirts to violence since taking office. [Before taking office, actually.]

Everything is proceeding as conservatives warned back in 2008. See, "It's the 1930s, and You Are There."

And it's all coming to a head this year, "Obama to make inequality the defining issue of 2014."

Bring it you leftist scum. Just f-king bring it.

AIPAC Slams Debbie Wasserman Schultz

As they should. She's despicable.

Interesting, though, is Foreign Policy's eyebrow-lifting angle, "One of Congress’s Most Pro-Israel Lawmakers Isn’t Pro-Israel Enough for AIPAC."

But see Breitbart's Joel Pollak, "AIPAC Confronting Debbie Wasserman-Schultz - Finally."

And here's the report that started this, at Free Beacon, "Debbie Wasserman Schultz Blocking Bipartisan Iran Sanctions: Breaks with Pro-Israel Democrats."

She's shilling for Obama's appeasement of Iran.

More here, "Debbie’s Double-Talk: DNC Chair tells Florida press she's for sanctions, tells Washington press she's for Obama."


She's vile.

Here's her anti-Israel record, at FrontPage, "Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Wrapping an Anti-Israeli Message With an Israeli Flag."

FLASHBACK: "DNC's Debbie Wasserman Schultz Caught Lying About Alleged 'Dangerous for Israel' Comment," and "Debbie Wasserman Schultz Denies Accusing Republicans of 'Undermining Israel Security' in Interview With CNN's Don Lemon."

#ObamaCare Disaster Faces New Test

It's not a new test, really. It's the same death spiral people have been talking about all along.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Health Law's Uneasy Launch: Affordable Care Act Faces Next Hurdles (at Google):

Nearly four years after President Barack Obama signed his health initiative into law, the Affordable Care Act is officially reshaping America's $2.75 trillion health-care system.

A survivor of bare-knuckle political fights, a U.S. Supreme Court challenge and a technologically disastrous rollout, the law now faces a fundamental test: Can its mix of government subsidies and market-based competition extend health insurance to millions of people whose medical conditions, income level or personal choice left them without it?

So far, there are some troubling signs. A high proportion of people signing up for new plans are older or have existing health problems—and not enough younger, healthier people may be joining the plans to balance them out and make the plans profitable.

Early glitches in HealthCare.gov, the federal marketplace serving 36 states, as well as in some state marketplaces likely deterred younger customers, said insurers and actuaries. Less-healthy shoppers were more likely to persist and sign up, they said.

If the trend continues as 2014 enrollment closes at the end of March, insurers in the new marketplaces "will think twice about losing money" and withdraw plans, said Jim O'Connor, an actuary at Milliman Inc. Provisions of the law aim to limit insurers' risk by redistributing money to those with less-healthy customers, but it isn't yet clear how effective they will be.

Joanne Peters, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the law's rollout, said the law "is making health insurance more affordable for young adults." Officials aren't yet able to provide demographic breakdowns of marketplace enrollees, she said.

Julie Bataille, communications director for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, told reporters this week that as of Jan. 1, "millions of Americans will have health insurance, many for the first time."

Meantime, some previously insured consumers are vexed that deductibles under the new policies are higher than under prior plans, which can make doctors' visits and procedures more expensive than they anticipated.

Moreover, 25 states have refused to expand Medicaid, the state-federal health plan for low-income people. The expansion was envisioned under the law as a backstop for the poorest uninsured, who now have few options in those states.

The array of challenges has hurt Mr. Obama's standing and public support of the law, which polls show dropped to a new low in late December.

Boosted by repairs to the online exchanges, 2.1 million people used them to obtain private insurance through Dec. 24, the deadline for picking coverage effective Jan. 1 in most states, U.S. health officials said Tuesday.

The number represents a surge since Nov. 30, when the nationwide figure was about 365,000, but it falls short of a September estimate by the administration that some 3.3 million people would sign up for private plans by year's end.

Well, not even that last part about 2.1 million is true. Just one more lie the administration's foisted on a compliant sheeple. See Philip Klein, "No, 2.1 million haven't enrolled in Obamacare plans."

And until it's repealed, ObamaCare will continue to drag down the quality of healthcare in America. WaPo has that, "With new year, Medicaid takes on a broader health-care role."