Islamic State's Most Barbaric Video Yet?

I think ISIS peaked in its barbarity when it failed to get underwater camera angles for that heinous cage drowning video, as bad as it was.

And some of the initial ISIS mass grave massacres were beyond comprehension, so I guess they're going back to them.

At London's Daily Mail, "Their sickest video yet: ISIS release footage of their biggest massacre in which prisoners were made to lay in mass graves before being machine-gunned to death."

And at Bare Naked Islam, "Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq releases snuff film showing slaughter of hundreds of Iraqi men and boys gunned down like animals in ditches."

Actually, for my money the burned alive in a cage video remains the most horrific. It's certainly the most difficult to watch, even worse than the mass snuff clips. Here, "Jordanian Hostage Moaz al-Kasasbeh Burned Alive (VIDEO)."

Triple Crown Winner American Pharoah at Del Mar Raceway

A magnificent animal. A thoroughbred. At Del Mar.

Planned Parenthood Sells Fetal Organs Harvested from Babies Murdered by Abortion (VIDEO)

At Live Action, "BREAKING: Planned Parenthood director caught on tape selling aborted ‘baby parts’."

And the statement from Live Action President Lila Grace Rose:

“This investigation by the Center for Medical Progress reveals the unimaginable horror that is Planned Parenthood. The exploitation of human life, the cover-up, and the black market profiteering by America’s largest abortion chain is not only egregious and heartbreaking, but exposes how the abortion giant is corrupt to the core — from the CEO, Cecile Richards, down to the local clinic. As Live Action has investigated through the years, Planned Parenthood’s barbaric practices reveal their contempt for rule of law and human life. This latest expose of Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of baby parts for profit should be the final nail in the coffin for the abortion giant. Congress must take immediate action to stop all taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood and end the bankrolling of this horrific human rights abuser.”

More at Twitchy, "MONSTERS: Planned Parenthood director brags … BRAGS about selling aborted baby body parts in this shocking video."

Also, "Planned Parenthood’s evil caught on tape: ONE heartbreaking, key question crushes PP’s ‘clump of cells’ lie," and "Washington Post changes headline about organ harvesting to ‘research,’ makes several edits."

Still more, "‘Are you kidding me?’ Newsweek spins like mad for Planned Parenthood — and it’s ‘beyond vile’," and "Patricia Heaton SICKENED by latest Planned Parenthood evil: Has demand for media that will make you say ‘Amen’."

See also, National Review, "Planned Parenthood Is Accused of Harvesting Organs from Aborted Babies. Is that Illegal?":

The release of video from this undercover investigation raises serious questions about whether PPFA allegedly has been engaged in federal and state criminal activity, which demands a full-blown criminal investigation. Putting aside the potential criminal liability of PPFA in the trafficking of aborted-fetal tissue, this activity is simply wrong and egregious and shows yet again the profit-driven nature of PPFA under its business model.

They're evil people. Leftists are evil.

.@KatMcKinley Leftists are evil. @RSMcCain

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) July 15, 2015

The Gruesome Ghouls of ‘Choice’ http://t.co/2uIpSfRXS1 #tcot #ProLife pic.twitter.com/hQpphk1k5N

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) July 15, 2015

.@washingtonpost changes original #PlannedParenthood headline from "organ harvesting" to "research" w/o noting change pic.twitter.com/yFkbL8blFx

— American Elephant (@AmericnElephant) July 14, 2015

Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Condemns Iran Nuclear Deal: 'One of the Darkest Days in World History' (VIDEO)

At Newsmax, "Netanyahu Denounces 'Historic Mistake' in English, Farsi":

The ink may still be wet on a nuclear accord reached between Iran and Western powers but critics — including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — have already taken to social media to decry it.

And at the New York Times, "Iran Deal Denounced by Netanyahu as 'Historic Mistake'":

JERUSALEM — Furiously denouncing the accord to limit Iran’s nuclear program on Tuesday as a “historic mistake,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not be bound by the agreement and warned of negative repercussions in a region already riven with rivalries and armed conflict.

Contrary to President Obama’s assertion that the agreement will cut off every pathway for Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, Israel’s leaders rejected the deal as a dangerous compromise that will exacerbate regional tensions and pave the way over time for Iran to produce multiple bombs — “an entire arsenal with the means to deliver it,” Mr. Netanyahu said.

Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its survival. For Mr. Netanyahu, the accord is the bitter culmination of a long struggle that has severely strained Israel’s relations with the United States, its crucial ally...

More at Israel Matzav, "One of the darkest days in history."

Angels' Mike Trout is MVP Again as AL Wins All-Star Game 6-3

Pretty sweet.

At the O.C. Register:

CINCINNATI — The All-Star Game is designed to be so much of a spectacle that the baseball part of it is accordingly overlooked. There are hours of pregame festivities, dozens of celebrities introduced, before the annual showcase ever begins.

Angels center fielder Mike Trout minimized all of that with the second swing of Tuesday’s game, when he took a 94-mph fastball from National League starter Zack Greinke to the opposite field, just over the outfield wall for a leadoff home run.

“Driving balls like that is pretty impressive,” Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershaw said. “He’s the best, in my opinion.”

Kershaw was the loser in the American League’s 6-3 victory over the National League in the 86th iteration of the All-Star Game. Afterward, Trout was named the game’s MVP for the second consecutive season.

No major leaguer ever had been so honored.

It was Trout’s fourth All-Star appearance. In the first at-bat of his first one, he singled. In the first at-bat of his second one, he doubled, and in his third one, he tripled. Tuesday’s homer completed the thoroughly unusual feat, never before matched — never before thought of, probably.

Before the game, Angels teammate Albert Pujols joked with him: “Go up there first-pitch swinging and hit it opposite field.”

Trout said he would, so he kind of called his shot. But, as Pujols said, “he actually waited until five pitches in.”

Also at Deadspin, "Mike Trout, American League Win All-Star Game 6-3."

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Out Today: Arthur Brooks, The Conservative Heart

Here, The Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier, and More Prosperous America.

Sexy Outtakes, Samantha Hoopes Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2015

Watch: "Samantha Hoopes Sexy Outtakes | Sports Illustrated Swimsuit."

PREVIOUSLY: "Samantha Hoopes, the Lady from the 'American Thickburger' Video."

Donald Trump Tops Latest Suffolk University/USA Today Poll of GOP Presidential Field

Well, Donald Trump hasn't peaked yet, but any means.

Here, "Suffolk University/USA TODAY Poll Shows Trump on Top with GOP Voters Nationwide":

Republican businessman Donald Trump is on a roll with likely GOP presidential primary voters, according to a Suffolk University/USA TODAY national poll.

Among voters who identify either as Republicans or independents and who plan to vote in their states’ Republican primaries or caucuses, 17 percent named Trump as their first choice for the GOP nomination in the 2016 presidential race.

Trump was followed by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (14 percent), Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (8 percent), Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (6 percent), Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (5 percent), retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson (4 percent), Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (4 percent), former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (4 percent) and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (3 percent). Receiving less than 2 percent each were former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, businesswoman Carly Fiorina, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, and former New York Gov. George Pataki.

A significant 30 percent of the Republican electorate remains undecided about whom they will support among a crowded field of candidates.

“Trump is making daily headlines in advance of the primary season,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “This has vaulted him to the top of the pack on the backs of conservative voters. But when you expand the electoral pool to include Democrats and independents that potency dissipates.”

Among self-identified conservative or very conservative Republican likely voters, Trump led Bush 17 percent to 11 percent, with all other candidates in single digits. However, among voters of all parties, Trump’s negatives were the highest, at 61 percent.

Look, how Trump fares against the potential Democrat nominee at this point doesn't matter. What matters is how well he's doing among Republican party primary voters, and so far his lead keeps growing. It's a problem for the GOP establishment. One way or another Trump's going to upend the normal patterns of party support, and if in the end he doesn't take the nomination he's hinted at running an outside insurgent independent campaign. Ross Perot won 20 percent in 1992, helping elect Bill Clinton to office. But, Perot screwed up by dropping out of the race, only to reenter at the end of summer, perhaps costing him enough votes to split the parties and win the presidency. That's a scenario that worrisome not just for the Republicans, but for the Democrats as well. And it's healthy for the democracy.

The Sad and Worn-Out Shakedown Shtick of Ta-Nehisi Coates

Ta-Nehisi Coates is being touted, apparently widely touted, as the James Baldwin of age of Barack Obama. The comparison is found in Thomas Chatterton Williams' essay at the Washington Post, "A black man’s stark, visceral experience of racism." What strikes me as so unconvincing about the analogy is the problem of Coates' worn-out unoriginality. We've seen this movie before, and the ending is almost all the same: White America owes blacks. White America owes blacks a better life, a better income, a better social status after hundreds of years of racial oppression and subordination from slavery to the present day. Blah, blah.

Coates' shtick is not only tired, but dishonest. He's been touted for his work as being particularly relevant in the age of Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, and, well, "there are too many to name." But as even a casual consumer of the news can see, the constant stories on America's "epidemic" of police brutality form a narrative that's mostly confined to white leftist elites in the media and academe, and to the underclass cultural thugs in cities and communities across America where the breakdown of the black family has left a Holocaust of fatherlessness and criminal hoodlum pathology.

Leftist elites don't want to talk about those issues, as I pointed out in my recent essay, "The Berkshire Eagle Under Fire for Publishing Perfectly Reasonable Op-Ed on the Breakdown of America's Black Community."

Twenty years ago Robert Boynton published "The New Intellectuals" at the Atlantic, ironically the same publication where Coates' makes his journalistic home today. The "new intellectuals" were America's post-civil rights-era black public intellectuals, people like Stanley Crouch, Shelby Steele, Derrick Bell, Henry Louis Gates, Randall Kennedy, Cornell West, Glenn Loury, and Stephen Carter. As Boynton writes:

FOR contemporary black intellectuals, the defining event of their lives was unquestionably the civil-rights movement. Playing a role that Marx believed was the exclusive property of the proletariat, African-Americans in the 1950s and 1960s were nothing less than the revolutionary subjects of history. However else one judges the legacy of those decades, one must surely agree with Stephen Carter when he argues that "the massive change in the legal and social status of black Americans was perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of the sixties." Although many members of today's generation of intellectuals were too young to take an active part in the protests and marches, their belief in the necessary and intimate connection between race and politics was gleaned from these events.

Shaped in response to a movement that explicitly used the rhetoric of citizenship to articulate its demands for political equality, this generation's conscious racial identity was qualitatively different from those of the generations that preceded it. Although this group's fate as Americans was still complex, it was a complexity in which the ideas of blackness and American citizenship sat in a determinate–if uneasy–relationship to each other. The Brown decision in 1954, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and other legislation combined to create the conditions for a notion of African-American citizenship that was a radical break from the past. Even in the face of brutal and persistent racism, to be black and American was now also to be legally empowered. The very concept of rights, the legal scholar Patricia Williams argues, "feels new in the mouths of most black people. The concept of rights, both positive and negative, is the marker of our citizenship, our relation to others." In this sense, young black intellectuals in the early 1970s understood the possibly beneficial and augmenting connection between their ethnic and American identities.

Reading people like Ta-Nehisi Coates today, it's as if America never experienced the revolution in rights and citizenship of the 1960s. To hear Coates, and many of his contemporaries in the leftist media, to be black today is in fact not to be empowered, but to be chained down in system of racism just as fundamentally evil as anything experienced by blacks at the height of slavery or Jim Crow.

This pose is fatally at odds with the reality of black life in America today. The average consumer of news, sports, literature, and popular culture is bombarded by a constant and powerful stream of black vitality, leadership, and excellence that confounds the most dire jeremiads of our bitterest left-wing critics.

The irony is compounded not just by the historical achievement of Barack Obama's election, but also by the president's promise to heal the jangling discords of our past. Polls now show that race relations in America are as bad as they've been in decades, since the Los Angeles riots at least, if not the long, hot summers of the 1960s. The situation is not due to an increase in white racism or a return to past patterns racial discrimination. It's due to the endless campaign by the political left, from the president on down, to filter every social problem today through the prism of race. And it's compounded by an unwillingness of the president and the Democrat Party to deal honestly with public policy disasters such as black inner-city crime and the lawlessness of illegal immigration that recently culminated in the murder of Kathryn Steinle.

Race relations in many respects form the foundation for the larger patterns of political polarization plaguing the American political system. Polarization is in fact being led by the extreme leftward lurch of the Democrat Party as it further entrenches the kind of statist socialism that doomed the Greek economy to backwardness and inescapable debt.

So, what does Ta-Nehisi Coates want? Well, reparations, for the most part. Of course there's virtually zero support for such reparations in public opinion, at least among white Americans (which is a sad commentary on the state of black America and its image of itself as a capable, independent social and economic community).

Years ago I argued that the promise of Barack Obama's election would indeed put the new president in a unique position, which would enable him to speak about race --- and especially about personal responsibility and self-sufficiency --- from a position of authority unmatched by any president in history. That opportunity has been lost in what has been an epic waste of political capital, a level of capital not likely to come around again in my lifetime. It's a sad commentary on the politicization of everything, but it's also a commentary on the challenge for the next president, to pick up the dropped baton and work for a renewed vision of the citizenship and opportunity bequeathed to us by civil rights leaders and public intellectuals in the age of Martin Luther King, Jr., and James Baldwin.

Rising Economic Insecurity Tied to Decades-Long Trend in Employment Practices

This ain't flashy identity politics, so Obama doesn't talk about it.

At the New York Times, "Growth in the ‘Gig Economy’ Fuels Work Force Anxieties":

When the California Labor Commissioner’s Office ruled last month that an Uber driver was an employee deserving of a variety of workplace protections — and was not, as the company maintained, an independent contractor — it highlighted the divided feelings many Americans have about what is increasingly being called the “gig economy.”

On one hand, start-ups like Uber, which is appealing the decision, and Lyft make it possible to conjure up rides on a smartphone in a few seconds’ time.

On the other, Uber — which directly employs fewer than 4,000 of the more than 160,000 people in the United States who depend on it for at least part of their livelihood — and similar companies pose a challenge to longstanding notions of what it means to hold a job.

As it happens, though, Uber is not so much a labor-market innovation as the culmination of a generation-long trend. Even before the founding of the company in 2009, the United States economy was rapidly becoming an Uber economy writ large, with tens of millions of Americans involved in some form of freelancing, contracting, temping or outsourcing.

The decades-long shift to these more flexible workplace arrangements, the venture capitalist Nick Hanauer and the labor leader David Rolf argue in the latest issue of Democracy Journal, is a “transformation that promises new efficiencies and greater flexibility for ‘employers’ and ‘employees’ alike, but which threatens to undermine the very foundation upon which middle-class America was built.”

Along with other changes, like declining unionization and advancing globalization, the increasingly arm’s-length nature of employment helps explain why incomes have stagnated and why most Americans remain deeply anxious about their economic prospects six years after the Great Recession ended.

Last year, 23 percent of Americans told Gallup they worried that their working hours would be cut back, up from percentages in the low to midteens in the years leading up to the recession. Twenty-four percent said they worried that their wages would be reduced, up from the mid- to high teens before the recession.

Even if the economy continues to improve, the lingering malaise will almost certainly be the central issue in next year’s presidential election.

On Monday, Hillary Rodham Clinton plans to give a speech outlining her vision for improving the economic fortunes of the middle class. Leading Republicans, like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, have framed their policy ideas as an attempt to solve economic insecurity and the erosion of middle-class incomes.

But the tidal wave sweeping through the American economy has already reshaped the political landscape — from the rise of an anti-Wall Street movement on the left to the Tea Party on the right — and is sowing frustration among a large mass of voters.

“Whether America will be America or not hinges on whether we have a downward spiral around wages,” said Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, a think tank closely aligned with Mrs. Clinton. “People know things are changing. They don’t feel like anyone has a handle on it. There’s a yearning for a political vision that addresses that.”

Neera Tanden?

What has she and the statist Center for American Progress ever done to improve the economic well-being of American citizens? These are the very people who're making life worse in this country.

More at the link.

Obama's Silence on Kathyrn Steinle Killing is Deafening

Nope, Obamnesty hasn't said a thing about the lovely Ms. Steinle. It's just too much of an inconvenient tragedy for his open-borders lawbreaking.

See Elizabeth Price Foley, blogging about Marc Thiessen's WaPo op-ed, at Instapundit, "BUT OBAMA WOULD HAVE TO ADMIT THAT OPEN BORDERS ARE DANGEROUS":

Of course, we know why President Obama doesn’t take the time out of his day to express sympathy for the families of such murdered victims. It doesn’t fit the liberal/progressive narrative to acknowledge that looking the other way on illegal immigration presents serious risks to public safety and national security. President Obama elevates his narrow ideology and party interests over these broader American interests.

Little Faith in Ugly Greece Bailout

It's gonna be extremely harsh.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Third Time’s the Charm? Little Optimism Over New Greece Bailout":

ATHENS — Greece’s new bailout is still in the making, but many economists already doubt it will work better than the last two.

The prospective program, involving as much as €86 billion ($96 billion) in further financing for Greece, could take several weeks to draft, European officials have indicated. Much can go wrong before then and a Greek exit from the euro—which came closer in the past week than ever before—remains a risk.

But the outlines are already clear after Monday’s summit of eurozone leaders.

The plan repeats the central features of the previous bailouts in 2010 and 2012. In return for loans, Greece’s creditors—other eurozone governments and the International Monetary Fund—want to see stringent fiscal retrenchment as well as market-oriented overhauls of Greece’s economy.

Greece’s overall debt is supposed to fall over time thanks to fiscal austerity, a return to economic growth, and hefty privatization proceeds.

The emphasis remains on fiscal austerity, because creditors view tough budget targets as the key to getting their money back and Greece back to funding itself on bond markets.

European Union and Greek officials claimed last year that the bailout was finally working when Greece briefly sold bonds again and its economy grew for part of the year, albeit from a deeply depressed base.

The good news proved ephemeral. Investors soon abandoned Greek debt as Athens again struggled to implement Europe’s bailout terms and political uncertainty returned, pushing the economy back into recession last winter.

Although heavy austerity greatly reduced Greece’s budget deficit, the economic collapse meant that its ratio of debt to gross domestic product—an indicator of solvency—rose even higher.

And Greece’s collapsing GDP and employment rate during its bailout years have eroded public support for the kind of market-friendly reforms that most economists believe are necessary if Greece is ever to prosper inside the euro.

Critics including many economists and some policy makers have leveled a string of criticisms at Greece’s earlier bailouts. Among the most common charges: The scale and pace of fiscal austerity proved to be an overdose that Greece’s sclerotic economy and unstable political system couldn’t cope with. Forecasts for growth, tax revenues and privatization revenues were overly optimistic. Broader economic overhauls took second place to fiscal cuts. And measures such as labor-market deregulation, inspired by international economic orthodoxy, failed to address Greece’s idiosyncratic problems, such as weak public administration and a sluggish legal system.

Defenders of the programs, including many European policy makers and IMF officials, retort that the main problem lay with Greek governments, which failed to take ownership of and responsibility for the programs.

The new program looks set to suffer from all of those problems, economists say.

“It’s just a continuation of failed policy packages, and if anything it’s worse,” says Charles Wyplosz, professor of economics at the Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva. “It hasn’t worked, it won’t work.”

One of the biggest problems, analysts say, is that Europe has given up even trying to persuade Greece that its prescriptions are good for the country—something that few Greeks believe any longer. Instead of much-vaunted “ownership” of the program by Greek leaders, Europe is instead counting on duress.

Eurozone leaders and finance ministers in recent days made it clear to Athens that only full compliance will avert Greece’s expulsion from the euro...

More.

PREVIOUSLY: "The Ugly Heart of the European Project," and "'Toxic' Deal Will Plunge Greece Into Turmoil After Tsipras 'Crucified' by EU Leaders at Summit, Say Analysts."

Iraq Launches Major Offensive on Islamic State Stronghold

At the Guardian UK, "Iraq launches new offensive to drive Isis from Anbar province":

Iraq declared the launch of a new military operation on Monday aimed at liberating the predominantly Sunni Anbar province, the country’s largest, from Islamic State control.

The campaign will include fighters from the Hashd al-Shaabi, a volunteer army dominated by Shia militias, Iraqi military units and Sunni tribesmen opposed to Isis. They are likely to strike first at the city of Falluja, which is under siege by pro-government forces.

The operation comes nearly two months after Isis seized Ramadi, the province’s capital, in one of the terror group’s greatest victories since its conquest of Nineveh and much of northern Iraq in a lightning advance last year.

The latest battle for Anbar will test the militants’ resilience and the effectiveness of the Hashd, which defeated Isis in a long and drawn-out battle for Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit earlier this year.

“Today at dawn the operations to liberate Anbar were launched,” a spokesman for Iraq’s join operations command said in a statement on state television. “The Hashd al-Shaabi, the armed forces, the special forces, the national police and the sons of the Anbar tribes are now carrying out the liberation battles and advancing on their goals.”

“We promise to exact revenge from the criminals of Daesh [Isis] in the field of battle,” Iraq’s prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, said in a statement. “Their cowardly crimes against unarmed civilians will only increase our resolve in pursuing them and evicting them from the last inch of Iraq’s territory.”

Ten thousand fighters are expected to take part in the battle, which will begin with an assault on Falluja, which has been besieged for weeks by pro-government forces seeking to oust the militants...

More.

The Left's Next Assault on Freedom and Decency: Religious Liberties

Bake the damned cake!

At the Los Angeles Times, "Battles over religious freedom are sure to follow same-sex marriage ruling":

For some, the Supreme Court's decision declaring that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry put the free exercise of religion in danger.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. was among them.

"Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage — when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to opposite-sex couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married couples," Roberts wrote in a dissent joined by three other justices.

He also perceived a threat to tax exemptions for religious schools and colleges that oppose same-sex marriage. "Unfortunately, people of faith can take no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today," Roberts said.

On the other hand, the same high court has expanded religious liberties. Just a year ago, the court's majority ruled for the Christian owners of the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores, holding they had a religious-freedom right to refuse to pay for certain contraceptives mandated by the Obama administration under the federal Affordable Care Act.

Only Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was in the majority both times — in favor of a right to marriage for gay and lesbian couples and in favor of a legal exemption based on a sincere religious belief.

The close divide among the justices almost ensures that new legal battles lie ahead. But when it comes to same-sex marriage, the June 26 ruling largely resolved the chief legal disputes.

Though some conservatives have complained that the decision forces religious people to perform same-sex weddings they believe violate their faith, ministers and pastors still have a right to refuse to participate in such ceremonies, as even supporters of gay rights are quick to acknowledge...

Of course they acknowledge it! Leftists won't be done until they destroy common decency and eradicate God from the whole of American life!

More, "LGBT activists say the fight doesn't end at marriage."

Of course it's not the end! It's just the beginning of the left's depravity!

The Left is Turning the U.S. into a Hellhole

It's Ann Coulter, at Pajamas Media.

And buy her new book, Adios, America: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole.

Scott Walker Launches Presidential Campaign 2016 (VIDEO)

This guy is a serious mainstream conservative candidate with a record.

It's going to be interesting to see how his bid plays out. Carl Cameron on Fox News earlier said the Walker was tops in the polls, right behind Jeb Bush. He omitted mention of Donald Trump, for reasons I'm not exactly sure except to discount the real estate tycoon as a fly-by-night longshot. He's no longshot at the moment, and Walker will have to debate him at one of these upcoming conservative conclaves.

In any case, at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, "Scott Walker makes it official, will kick off 2016 campaign in Waukesha."

And at National Journal, "Can Scott Walker Have It Both Ways: Conservative Now, Moderate Later?"

Well, can anybody have it both ways? It's not just Scott Walker. (At Memeorandum.)

Emily Ratajkowski Shows Off Her Famous Curves in Bikini Shots from Vacation in Italy

At London's Daily Mail, "Emily Ratajkowski flaunts ample cleavage in sexy snaps on Italian holiday."

And ICYMI, "Rule 5 Monday."

Rule 5 Monday

Wombat-socho's got yesterday's roundup, at the Other McCain, "Rule 5 Sunday: The Persistence of the Bunny."

Also at Pirate's Cove, "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup," and "If All You See……is an evil fossil fueled camper, you might just be a Warmist."

And at the Hostages, "Well hello there, Ms. Hipster-Glasses-and-sexy-abs."

At Wirecutter's, "And a Monday milf for you."

BONUS: At Egotastic!, "CHARLOTTE MCKINNEY TOPLESS ON INSTAGRAM! Blonde bombshells blonde bombshells!" And at London's Daily Mail, "'I was hacked': Model Charlotte McKinney denies posting nude photos of herself on Instagram."

Below: Emily Ratajkowski

Harper Lee Novel Reads Like a 'Failed Sequel'

You know, "To Kill a Mockingbird" is a really good book, so even if "Go Set a Watchman" is a step down or two, it still might be pretty good.

It's best to read if for yourself. Here's the Amazon link, "Go Set a Watchman: A Novel."

That said, here's NPR book critic Maureen Corrigan with Kate Bolduan, "Critic calls new Harper Lee novel is a 'failed sequel'..."

This "most anticipated novel" is looking to be something of a scam money-tree shaking pulp fiction knock-off, heh.

The Ugly Heart of the European Project

From Edward Harrison, at Foreign Policy, "Over the past week, European institutions have shown no qualms about bullying, arm-twisting, and humiliating a sovereign nation and its people":

Going into this past weekend, it looked as if the Grexit crisis that had occupied the world’s attention for weeks was finally heading into the final stretch.

Under pressure to comply with creditor demands, on Thursday Greece tabled a proposal that contained harsher austerity measures than the proposal that the Greek people had overwhelmingly rejected by referendum just one week prior. Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras then quickly garnered parliamentary approval for his proposal, to avoid the country’s economic collapse, returning to the negotiating table this weekend. Under pressure to make labor reforms, liberalize markets, and accelerate privatization in the face of threats to exclude Greece from the eurozone from German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, Greece had caved. It was total and complete capitulation — the white flag, if you will.It was total and complete capitulation — the white flag, if you will. Surely, it seemed by Friday morning, an agreement was close at hand.

But once Greece was at the table, something strange happened. The creditors upped the ante, looking for Greece to sign up to even more draconian and harsh terms. After hours of bickering, the negotiations ended with no conclusion and yet another ultimatum backed by Germany and its allies in the Netherlands, Austria, and the former eastern Bloc: either Greece accept the Eurogroup’s latest, more austere proposal for a bailout, ratify this series of reforms through Parliament by Wednesday or leave the eurozone “temporarily.” The demands included spending cuts, accelerated privatization, resolution of non-performing loans in the Greek banking system, and many other measures, all to be accomplished under the watchful eye of the Troika to ensure compliance. Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi saw these harsh terms as an attempt to humiliate Greece — as did many others commenting via Twitter.

Last Monday, I wrote on how the Greek referendum wouldn’t, and couldn’t, have changed the country’s reality. And that reality — the one that remains in place today — is that Greece faces one of only two possible outcomes: either harsh austerity and continued economic suffocation or exclusion from the eurozone, the so-called Grexit. The latter being a move that would precipitate a collapse in the banking system and economic turmoil.

Some may have believed that the overwhelming “no” vote of the referendum might have strengthened Greece’s hand, by creating an ugly dynamic in which the creditors appear to be overriding the democratically expressed wishes of a sovereign nation. After this weekend, those hopes have been dashed. The Greek government remains a supplicant, asking for mercy from its creditors, with little to no bargaining power.The Greek government remains a supplicant, asking for mercy from its creditors, with little to no bargaining power. And the institutions, known as the Troika, have shown no qualms about trampling over delicate sovereignty issues. What transpired this past weekend and the days leading up to it was pure power politics...

Like I said. That's harsh.

See also, "'Toxic' Deal Will Plunge Greece Into Turmoil After Tsipras 'Crucified' by EU Leaders at Summit, Say Analysts."

'Toxic' Deal Will Plunge Greece Into Turmoil After Tsipras 'Crucified' by EU Leaders at Summit, Say Analysts

Well, I was right about this, that Greece wouldn't leave the EU, or the Euro itself, although this is sounding pretty harsh.

At the Telegraph UK, "Prime minister Tsipras forced to concede to toughest measures ever imposed on eurozone economy in return for opening talks on a new rescue package worth €86bn."

Kathryn Steinle's Fellow Victims

At FrontPage Magazine, "The forgotten murdered police and teenagers of America":

Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, also known as José Inez García Zarate, is a felon who has been deported five times. Lopez-Sanchez is charged in the shooting death of Kathryn Steinle, 32, by all indications a distinguished and compassionate woman. As it happens, victims of foreign nationals in the United States illegally are not limited to innocent civilians. They include police officers such as Danny Oliver.

Last October, Luis Enriquez Monroy Bracamontes, a Mexican national in the United States illegally, gunned down Oliver, 47, a Sacramento County Sheriff’s deputy. Bracamontes shot Oliver in the head with a 9mm handgun but the killer and his wife Janelle Marquez Monroy also packed an AR-15 rifle. After killing Danny Oliver, Bracamontes and Monroy shot Anthony Holmes, a motorist who refused to give up his car. Holmes survived the shooting but later Bracamontes killed police detective Michael Davis with the AR-15 and wounded Jeff Davis, a deputy. Bracamontes also fired at Placer County deputies Charles Bardo and Joseph Roseli before being captured and arrested.

At the time Bracamontes was going by the alias “Marquez,” and it emerged that he had used at least five aliases and two Facebook names. He had been arrested multiple times in Arizona on drug and weapons charges. As the Sacramento Bee put it, “He was deported to Mexico twice, but managed to return to the United States illegally.” Reports also said Bracamontes had “repeatedly” entered the country illegally.

“I killed them cops,” Bracamontes told a judge in February before demanding an execution date. In March he joked he couldn’t make the next hearing because, as he said, “I’m busy.”

Rep. Ami Bera, a northern California Democrat, invited the slain officer’s wife Susan Oliver, an African American, to president Obama’s State of the Union Speech. Her message was “build unity between citizens and law enforcement” but the president ignored the case, despite Bracamonte’s use of a military-style weapon. The Mexican national still faces counts of first-degree murder with five special circumstance allegations, including killing law enforcement officers, committing multiple murders, murder to avoid arrest, and murder during a carjacking or attempted carjacking...

Keep reading.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders Stealing Major Party Thunder

From Glenn Reynolds, at USA Today, "The Donald and Bernie show":

Political parties exist, first and foremost, to serve the interest of the insiders, while doling out just enough in the way of favors and ideological satisfaction to keep the party outsiders on the reservation. But when the members of the "Outer Party" feel sufficiently ignored, a champion appears who will take their interests to heart, or at least sound as if he does.

That's what's happening in both parties with the rise of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., (actually, he identifies as a Socialist, but caucuses with, and apparently now is campaigning as, a Democrat) and Republican Donald Trump (actually he identifies mostly with himself, and campaigns mostly on TV talk shows). Each, in his own way, speaks to the concerns of constituencies within his party (and, interestingly, to some degree the other party) that are being ignored or dismissed by the insiders.

Sanders recently went after the Obama administration on inequality and unemployment, noting that although the official government unemployment is at 5.4%, the real unemployment figure, including those who have given up looking for work or who are involuntarily working part-time, is 10.5%, almost double.

What's more, he notes, youth unemployment is even worse. For young high school graduates, unemployment is 33% for whites, 36% for Hispanics and 51% for blacks. Never mind that Sanders' proposed minimum-wage increase would make that worse. The point is that he's speaking to a concern that is evident to ordinary Democrats around the country, but that is concealed by the Obama administration's gauzy proclamations of economic recovery.

Likewise, his attacks on billionaire power over the government ring true in an age where Hillary Clinton gets $300,000 speaking fees, and where President Obama's campaign contributions from Wall Street have earned him the nickname President Goldman Sachs. Obama, of course, attacked Wall Street on the campaign trail, but by now Democratic Party faithful have figured out that it's Wall Street that's calling the shots.

As The Economist says, "Forget the 1% — it is the .01% who are really getting ahead in America."

And as The New York Times recently noted, the benefits of this "recovery" have gone almost entirely to the rich. "In the first three years of the current expansion, incomes actually fell for the bottom 90% of earners, even as they rose nicely for the top 10%. The result: The top 10% captured an impossible-seeming 116% of income gains during that span. ... One percent of the population, in the first three years of the current expansion, took home 95% of the income gains."

Sanders' solutions might be ill-conceived, but at least he's talking about a problem that the incumbent, and the front-runner, are largely happy to ignore. And though, as an aged, openly Socialist, white male, he might not have been the dream candidate, Sanders draws enthusiastic crowds who are grateful that someone is speaking to their concerns.

Likewise, Trump. His signature issue is immigration. The GOP establishment likes open borders because its big corporate donors want cheap labor. (The Democratic establishment likes open borders because immigrants usually vote Democratic.) But many ordinary Americans — mostly, but not at all exclusively, Republicans — wonder what's in it for them. More immigrants means more competition for jobs, pushing wages down, whether it's at entry-level unskilled jobs, or at the higher-level tech jobs where employers abuse H1B visas to bring in cheap foreign labor.

Most GOP pols won't touch this issue, which pairs the risk of scaring off immigration-dependent donors with the added danger of being called racist by Democrats. Trump doesn't care, so he is willing to raise the issue anyway. And he has done so effectively: Two weeks ago, the immigration template involved stories about "DREAMers" who want to go to college; now it involves multiple-arrested undocumented immigrants who kill women. Trump might not be the ideal candidate of the Republican Party's discontented members either, but, again, they're grateful that someone is talking about their concerns instead of trying to bury them.

Both Sanders and Trump pose threats to their respective establishments...

Big threats. It's going to be especially interesting if Donald Trump makes a third party bid after everything shakes out. He'll hurt both parties, but he'll spoil the party for the GOP.

Personally, pace Kevin D. Williamson, at this point I don't really care.

Battle of Britain Flyover Event at Buckingham Palace (VIDEO)

Spitfires, Hurricanes and Typhoon fighter jets joined the aerial display above the Mall in central London.

Shop Amazon Apparel & Accessories

Here, Shop Amazon Fashion - Men's Clothing.

Plus, ICYMI, The Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier, and More Prosperous America.

U.S. Air Force Working to Update Cold War-Era B61 Nuclear Bomb

At Russia Today:

The United States Air Force is taking steps to update the Cold War-era B61 nuclear bomb to Mod 12 ‒ or twelfth iteration ‒ completing tests with a mock up version of the weapon in Nevada’s Great Basin Desert.

The B61 has been a top weapon in the US nuclear arsenal since its development at the height of the Cold War in 1963. The intermediate-yield thermonuclear weapon can be delivered by a supersonic aircraft. It is designed to cause a two-stage radiation implosion, but it is a “gravity bomb” – which just means that it’s unguided.

The once USSR-facing technology might seem to be an anachronism in this day and age, but President Barack Obama has taken initiative in keeping this weapon alive and well, despite a hefty price tag. The total cost of the program is estimated to be as high as $11 billion, according to the New York Times – and that’s just to update it to its current version.

This seems to be at odds with Obama’s promise of not fielding any new nuclear warheads, which he made during a speech in Prague in 2009. In that same speech, he explained his vision of a United States with less reliance on nuclear arms, and ultimately a world where nuclear weapons are a thing of the past.

The Political Left is Very Nervous That the 'Silent Majority' May Have Finally Found a Voice

At great post from Elizabeth Price Foley, at Instapundit, "TRUMP HAS THE LEFT QUAKING."

Olivia Jordan, Miss Oklahoma, Wins Miss USA 2015

At the New Orleans Times-Picayune, "Miss Oklahoma USA wins Miss USA 2015 crown in Baton Rouge."

Mexican Drug Lord 'El Chapo' Guzmán Escapes From Prison

The Wall Street Journal reports, "Joaquín ‘El Chapo’ Guzmán had evaded authorities before."

And this is interesting, at the Los Angeles Times, "Mexico drug lord Guzman's escape tunnel is a minor engineering masterpiece":

The tunnel stretched a mile long, from the jailhouse shower to an empty building in a cornfield, and was deep enough for drug kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman to stand upright as he made his escape.

A minor engineering masterpiece, some might say, equipped with ventilation, lighting, oxygen tanks, scaffolding and a motorcycle contraption for removing the tons of dirt being excavated.

Guzman, Mexico’s most powerful drug lord, escaped sometime Saturday night from a maximum-security prison through the clandestine passageway, authorities announced Sunday.

He had often used tunnels, as well as bribes and murder, to stay steps ahead of the law during his last decade on the lam. Yet, after his capture last year, the president of Mexico said losing him again would be “unpardonable.”

No doubt an inside job. More than 30 guards and staffers are being held for questioning.

BONUS: At Pajamas, "Twitter Users Call for Donald Trump’s Murder Following Mexican Drug Lord’s Prison Escape." And, "'El Chapo' tweets erupt after drug lord's prison break."

Leftists would seriously love to kill Donald Trump. Their ideology is the ideology of murder.

Stunning Blonde Lindsey Pelas Lights Your 4th of July Barbecue

Well, mid-July barbecue, but I've lost track of the days, lol.

Here: "Keep Your BBQ's Going With Lindsey Pelas."

Donald Trump's Truth Talk Inspires

He inspires, but also divides and inflames, according to the Los Angeles Times, "Donald Trump's immigration stance divides, inflames and inspires":

For Mark Ulatowski, the opportunity to see Donald Trump — brash, fiery and unapologetic as ever — was well worth the three-hour drive north from his home near the U.S.-Mexico border.

"He speaks to me. He speaks to a lot of us, because he speaks the truth," said Ulatowski, a U.S. Army veteran who made the trek Saturday to see the real estate mogul turned reality television star, and now GOP presidential hopeful, denounce illegal immigration and castigate Democrats and fellow Republicans alike.

"It's not just about him actually standing up and fighting against illegal immigration," said Ulatowski as he stood in 100-degree heat alongside thousands waiting to enter the sprawling downtown convention center. "He says what politicians would never say, and that's refreshing."

A blunt-spoken hero to fans like Ulatowski, an exasperating blowhard to his many critics, Trump seized the spotlight in the Republican presidential campaign with his inflammatory comments about Mexican immigrants, and for more than two weeks has refused to relinquish center stage despite increasingly frantic pleas from GOP officials.

His denunciations of illegal immigrants and foreign competitors, from China to Mexico, have struck a chord with millions of voters — particularly older, white conservatives, polls indicate — who feel that most politicians have ignored their concerns. Their backing has propelled Trump to the front rank of the splintered GOP field.

At the same time, Trump's words have harmed the party's already tenuous efforts to attract minority voters, particularly Latinos, whom a Republican presidential nominee would need to win key states in the 2016 election. And the cautious and tentative comments that most of the other GOP candidates have made in response have highlighted how narrow a path the party must tread if it hopes to win the presidency — trying to reach out to minority voters while fearing to alienate the conservative whites who have formed the GOP's base of support in recent elections.

In an appearance here that coupled fiery rhetoric with over-the-top displays of self-love — "I went to the Wharton School of Finance; I'm, like, a really smart person," he declared at one point — Trump reinforced both parts of his image. He served up the sort of blunt talk that his supporters praise along with lines that critics cite when they label him an overweening narcissist.

His supporters, he said, were a "silent majority" who would be able to tilt the Republican presidential primaries, which will begin seven months from now, in his favor.

Appearing with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a fierce foe of illegal immigration, Trump did not limit himself to immigration issues. At various points, he took on President Obama ("You know I don't use teleprompters like the president — I speak from the heart"), Caroline Kennedy, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Jeb Bush, NBC and Univision.

He offered few specifics for a campaign, other than to insist he'd do a better job than either Clinton or Bush — two candidates on opposite sides of the aisle who come from political dynasties that many of his backers see as symbols of an unresponsive political establishment.

That's been enough to push Trump forward. In a Reuters-Ipsos poll released Saturday, Bush and Trump were tied at 15% for the lead nationwide in the Republican field.

The Reuters survey was the second national poll in recent days showing Trump with about 15% of the GOP vote and in the top tier of the crowded field. An Economist/YouGov survey showed Trump was one of the Republican front-runners and simultaneously its most widely disliked candidate...

So he's divisive. At least he's standing up for something, which again explains why he's surged literally to the top of the polls. He's got the establishment quaking. It's pretty amazing. And it would have been pretty amazing to see him speak at the Phoenix rally.

Pennsylvania Democrat Disarray Could Boost Republicans in 2016

From Selena Zito, at RCP, "PA Dems' Disarray Could Boost GOP in 2016":

@KurtSchlichter in all the years I have been covering this stuff this is their best year

— SalenaZito (@SalenaZitoTrib) July 12, 2015

Republicans held a smart, enthusiastic, well-organized leadership conference here last month that drew presidential candidates and party rock stars, plus edgy, informative panels for grassroots activists. But they will need a lot more than that to cross Pennsylvania's finish line in the 2016 presidential election.

Oddly, Republican fortunes might rest in state Democrats' hands — and the way things are going for Democrats, that just might work out.

Democrats have dominated this all-important electoral state for five presidential cycles; this is one of three states of which a candidate must win two (the others are Ohio and Florida) in order to clinch the presidency.

Former Gov. Ed Rendell's charisma and political skills are legendary among Democrats, and the party is eagerly preparing for what promises to be a premier national convention in this city next year.

Yet below the surface, the state party is in shambles. With the exception of two county officials on either side of the state — Montgomery's Commissioners Chairman Josh Shapiro, Allegheny's Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald — the Democrats' statewide bench is weak, and so is their morale.

Consider the following four factors:

Down-ballot bench — Last year's midterms and a special state House election in the spring boosted the Republicans' lower-chamber ranks to 120, a 36-seat advantage over Democrats. Republicans also expanded their majority to 30 members in the state's 50-seat Senate.

Pennsylvania Democrats led the nation in trouncing Republicans in 2006's historic wave election, but their power didn't last long. By 2010, their majority in Pennsylvania's congressional delegation was wiped out; by 2012, Republicans held 13 seats to Democrats' five.

Scandals — Two statewide-elected Democrats, darlings of the party just 18 months ago, have fallen from grace rather abruptly.

Former state Treasurer Rob McCord pleaded guilty to extortion earlier this year in federal court; his forced resignation came less than a year after his unsuccessful campaign for his party's nomination for governor.

Then there is Attorney General Kathleen Kane.

The first Democrat and first woman to be elected as the state's top cop has run her office like a script for a really, really bad soap opera. The drama with the former political golden girl, who was carried into office by the Clinton machine, has escalated over two years, leading to a statewide grand jury recommending that she be charged with obstruction of justice, official oppression, perjury and contempt in connection with documents allegedly covered by grand jury secrecy rules being leaked to a Philadelphia newspaper.

Trouble at the top — It's not uncommon for a party chairman and a governor to not get along, but usually that only occurs between opposing parties. The fault lines between Democrats state Chairman Jim Burn and Gov. Tom Wolf are epic and reminiscent of an escalating schoolyard spat.

Wolf despised Burn so much that he created his own shadow state party when he successfully ran for governor; Burn stubbornly refused to budge, and he retained the support of state committee members.

Under Burn's leadership, the party won one presidential election but lost a U.S. Senate seat, a governor's race, historic majorities in the state Legislature and the majority in the congressional delegation.

Divisive campaign — For a guy who came within 2 percentage points of beating Republican Pat Toomey for a U.S. Senate seat in an exceptionally good year for the GOP, former Congressman Joe Sestak of Delaware County sure doesn't get much love or support from establishment Democrats, either in Washington or in the state.

If kitchen sinks could run for office, the national party probably would have asked one to do so by now; it has asked Montgomery County's Shapiro, Allegheny County's Fitzgerald, and now, Wolf's chief of staff, Katie McGinty, after Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski suspended his campaign for next year's U.S. Senate primary because of legal troubles...

The Berkshire Eagle Under Fire for Publishing Perfectly Reasonable Op-Ed on the Breakdown of America's Black Community

Seen just now at Memeorandum, from D.R. Tucker, at the Washington Monthly, "All the Views Unfit to Print."

It turns out that the Berkshire Eagle, a small-town paper in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, is regretting its decision to have conservative Steven Nikitas write a bi-weekly column for its op-ed pages. Pittsfield, apparently a progressive New England community, didn't react well to a conservative bringing down the hammer of cold harsh reality on the breakdown of black America, and so there's been a revolt at the commentary pages.

The Boston Globe reports, "Column on race by Berkshires official sparks debate."

And here's the offending op-ed from Mr. Nikitas, "Here's the solution for black America":

After the burning and looting in Baltimore and Ferguson we are seeing endless media hand-wringing that somehow "we" must all do something more to help black America. And "we" means white people, taxpayers, businesses, the criminal justice system, the universities and the government. But blacks must now pull themselves up. "We" have done far too much already with tens of trillions in handouts in the last 50 years, and it has backfired badly.

Conservatives and Republicans have offered sure-fire solutions for black America and they have been rejected repeatedly. Our advice has been for African-Americans to discard the leadership of the Democrat party and charlatans like Al Sharpton. After all, far-left liberalism has obviously failed. The proof is everywhere.

END BLAME GAME

Conservatives have recommended over and over that blacks reform their culture from top to bottom by respecting marriage and the family and the law, returning to their churches, embracing education and hard work, avoiding violence and debased rap music, speaking clearly, shunning drugs and profanity, and pulling up their pants. And to stop blaming all of their problems on everyone else. That is immature, cowardly and counterproductive.

What respectable business owner would hire a young black male from the "hood" who won't even show up for work? What successful enterprise is going to establish itself in crime-ridden inner cities? Isn't looting and burning self-defeating?

Now some media commentators are lamenting that there are too many rundown buildings in Baltimore and that they must be demolished and rebuilt new. That is code language meaning that taxpayers should fund more free housing while the rational response is that blacks must rebuild their Baltimore neighborhoods themselves because self-reliance is their only hope. And it always works. White people in Baltimore are doing it every day.

The violence there is part of a self-destructive pattern that is largely a result of blacks following the wrong leaders. Demagogues like Sharpton merely incite rather than instruct. Democrats have constructed a fortress welfare state that has extinguished black self-improvement while Republicans have warned that it is a dead end and have stressed economic opportunity and a work ethic instead.

The teacher unions and their political cronies control the frightening inner-city schools with an iron grip, while conservatives have sought charter schools, vouchers and educational choice. Liberals say that single motherhood is a valid way of life but Republicans vehemently disagree, with distressing poverty statistics about single mothers and their children to prove the case. And on and on. Yet every day conservatives are vilified as the bad guys of race relations.

Nonsense. The Republican Party was the staunch ally of blacks for 100 years. It was established in 1854 as the anti-slavery party. Evangelical Christians fought in the forefront to abolish slavery here, and in England in the person of the legendary William Wilberforce. Republican president Abraham Lincoln emancipated the slaves. Every black elected official after the Civil War was a Republican. Virtually all blacks were Republicans up until the 1950s including Martin Luther King and his father.

But in the 1960s white liberals told blacks that they would fight together for "civil rights" and sold them a destructive bill of social permissiveness along with it, buying them off with mountains of taxpayer cash...

There's still more, but you get the picture.

Nikitas is too brutally honest for his own good, and his reward is to be attacked as "racist" by this idiot D.R. Tucker. Note that Tucker doesn't rebut a single point made by Nikitas. Instead he sticks his nose up in the air and declares Nikitas' views outside the realm of respectable "progressive" discussion. Indeed, Tucker attacks the Berkshire Eagle for deigning to give this flyover ruffian "valuable space" on the op-ed pages.

We have here once again a sharp-eyed focus on what's wrong not just with black America, but what's wrong with American politics altogether: Political correctness, and the abject fear of leftists in particular to speak honestly about all that's wrong with the culture. You ask any honest businessman and they'll tell you they just can't employ people who wear sagging baggy pants hanging halfway down past the buttocks. We still have standards of professionalism, amazingly, but to call out such things as part of the solution to black America's woes is "racist."

Nikitas nailed it. We are indeed no longer a single nation united under common shared beliefs. We are a divided nation, being ripped apart by the politicization of everything, the ascendance of regressive depravity as society's moral norms, and by a Democrat Party that cares only about its own power, not about the genuine improvement for the lives of those most endangered by all of this dysfunction.

It's very sad. And indeed, it's why more and more commonsense Americans are turning away from politics, removing themselves to the private realm of family, faith, and local community.

Additional commentary at Memeorandum.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."



Also at Randy's Roundtable, "Friday Nite Funnies," and Reaganite Republican, "Reaganite's SUNDAY FUNNIES."

Cartoon Credit: Comically Incorrect.

The Kaleidoscope Society

From Ronald Brownstein, at National Journal, "America’s hurtling change is inverting our oldest national motto":

The Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, President Obama's wrenching eulogy in Charleston, and a Census Bureau report that kids of color for the first time now make up a majority of America's under-5 population all arrived within one indelible 24-hour period late last week.

Each event sent the same unmistakable message: The demographic and cultural change recasting America is only accelerating. Against that backdrop, the most timely question this July 4 may be whether Americans believe we are still capable of achieving the soaring standard of unity celebrated in the nation's founding motto: e pluribus unum—out of many, one.

It was undoubtedly easier to embrace that vision when the many were more alike than not. For most of our history, most Americans have been white Protestants who ended their formal education before obtaining a college degree, and then married as adults. Under that broad umbrella many differences persisted. But even into the late 20th century, it would not have been unreasonable to say those characteristics identified a "typical American."

Like a river cutting through rock, currents of cultural, demographic, and social change have eroded those pillars of American identity over the past generation. On every front, America is moving from a single common experience to a panorama of alternative experiences.

Consider religion. As recently as the early 1990s, about 60 percent of Americans, a solid majority, identified as Protestants. But surveys by Gallup and the Pew Research Center indicate that sometime around 2007, Protestants (who themselves divide between mainline and evangelical denominations) fell below a majority. No religion now claims loyalty from half of Americans. The fastest growing segment is those who claim no religious affiliation; they have soared from only about one-in-20 Americans in the early 1970s to nearly one-in-four now.

On race, America is following a similar trajectory. In 1980, non-Hispanic whites represented about four-fifths of the population. The Census reported last week they had fallen to around 62 percent. The change has advanced even faster among young people. The school year that just concluded marked the first time kids of color made up a majority of K-12 public school students nationwide. The Census findings on the diversifying under-5 population point towards the larger transformation looming after 2040: a society with no racial majority.

America's educational mix is diversifying too. In 1967, only one-in-10 adults had completed college. Now, nearly one-in-three have done so. Family life is also reorganizing around new combinations as heterosexual marriage rates slip, single parenthood increases, and more same-sex couples form.

These changes have left the nation without any single dominant group. One way to measure that is to consider Americans eligible to vote. In 1980, one group alone represented nearly half of all eligible voters: whites who were married but lacked a college degree. Today that group represents fewer than one-in-four eligible voters, according to Census data analyzed by the nonpartisan States of Change project. And no other single group is larger.

In all these ways, America is inverting the e pluribus formula. A national motto that more accurately describes our modern disaggregation would read: "out of one, many." Attitudes toward this hurtling change, I believe, represent the central division in our polarized politics. Democrats rely on a "Coalition of Transformation," built around minorities, millennials and socially-liberal, college-educated whites (especially women) largely comfortable with this social and racial transformation; Republicans mobilize a competing "Coalition of Restoration" that revolves around the older, blue-collar, rural, and religiously-devout whites most uneasy with some or all of these changes.

The distance between these perspectives was captured by the impassioned language in last week's Supreme Court decision establishing the nationwide right to same-sex marriage. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy grounded the right to marriage in the Transformation Coalition's core conviction that change refreshes America's founding principles: "Changed understandings of marriage are characteristic of a Nation where new dimensions of freedom become apparent to new generations." Writing for the minority, Chief Justice John Roberts crystallized the Restoration Coalition's core fear that unconstrained change is tearing the nation from its moorings: "The Court today not only overlooks our country's entire history and tradition but actively repudiates it, preferring to live only in the heady days of the here and now."

From Charleston to the Supreme Court steps, so many of America's conflicts raise the same question: What binds a nation now woven with so many distinct threads?

A great piece.

Lots of conservatives, especially the kinds you see on Facebook posting all kinds of apocalyptic rants, have given up on the America they once knew. I do think we've reached a turning point, but politics changes too. And the old Democrat Party big government model is ill-suited to the post e pluribus polity that's emerging. The voters realize this, especially younger Americans who aren't going to be tied down to leftist statism and stagnation. Sure, young leftists are socially progressive, but they're also libertarian and entrepreneurial, exactly what the Democrat Party collectivists are not.

There's still a huge opportunity for conservatives. All the better if Hillary Clinton is nominated. It's going to be a real culture clash, largely between old and busted Democrats and the young, mobile, and diverse demographic. These folks are up for grabs, especially if a Republican candidate makes connecting and appealing to these voters a priority.

Still more from Brownstein at the link.

The Counternarrative on Donald Trump

From Kevin Williamson, at National Review, "Republican Base and Donald Trump — WHINOS Are Frustrated and Choosing Foolishly":

That’s generally misunderstood on the Left is that the tea-party movement did not arise as an alternative to the Obama-Reid-Pelosi Democrats but as an alternative to the Bush-McConnell-Hastert Republicans, who were judged to have spent too much, warred too recklessly, and — most significant — to have been too ready to make themselves complicit in the bailouts.

What began as a bracing revolt quickly congealed into pasty dogma.

I’ve spent the past few days at FreedomFest in Las Vegas, Mark Skousen’s annual gathering of liberty-minded activists — think of it as CPAC for people who like weed and gold coins and who are maybe interested in hearing a pitch about taking up domicile in Belize. Far from a doctrinaire libertarian (or even Libertarian) affair, it draws a large number of self-described constitutional conservatives and limited-government types of all persuasions, including Republican activists and candidates.

It is also WHINO central.

You know the RINO — Republican In Name Only — but you may be less familiar with the WHINO. The WHINO is a captive of the populist Right’s master narrative, which is the tragic tale of the holy, holy base, the victory of which would be entirely assured if not for the machinations of the perfidious Establishment. Never mind the Democrats, economic realities, Putin, ISIS, the geographical facts of the U.S.-Mexico border — all would be well and all manner of things would be well if not for the behind-the-scenes plotting of Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and their enablers, who apparently can be bribed with small numbers of cocktail weenies. The WHINO is a Republican conspiracy theorist, in whose fervid imaginings all the players — victims, villains — are Republicans.

Barack Obama? Pshaw. The real enemy is Jeb Bush.

That this is a deeply stupid view of the world should go without saying, but if you need evidence, consider that the WHINO vote has settled for the moment upon Donald Trump, a Hillary Rodham Clinton donor who supports Canadian-style single-payer health care and amnesty for as many illegal immigrants as he imagines to exist, who has 0.00 percent chance of winning a general election and who is, as if more were needed, a ridiculous buffoon.

Ask the WHINO to explain that and you will get the characteristic WHINO whine: “But what about the baaaaaaaaase!?!”

Which is to say, the WHINO loves Trump not because Trump confounds the Democrats or because he constitutes a serious threat to a Democratic victory in 2016, but because he confounds the Republicans and constitutes a serious threat to a Republican victory in 2016. The worst part of the WHINO approach is the campaign strategery. At FreedomFest, I did an interview with Matthew Boyle of Breitbart Radio, a nice enough guy but a pretty good example of the WHINO style in American politics. What about Romney? Boyle demanded. Romney, he said with absolute assurance, lost to Barack Obama because millions of conservatives stayed home, finding him insufficiently committed to their cause.

The first aspect of what is wrong with this analysis is obvious: It assumes that a “real conservative” who couldn’t beat Mitt Romney in a Republican primary dominated by “real conservatives” would have defeated Barack Obama in a national election not dominated by conservatives at all, i.e. that Romney was the weakest candidate except for all the guys who couldn’t beat him.

But the defects in this analysis do not stop there. I am not sure that the psephology actually says what the WHINOs think it does, but even if it were so, the further problem with this line of thinking is obvious: If you are a conservative, and if you believe that the way to reform American public policy is to elect conservatives, and you arrived at Election Day believing that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were, from the conservative point of view, interchangeable commodities, then you are either a fanatic or extraordinarily ill-informed. In either case, you owe it to yourself and to your country to be a better citizen, and maybe read a book. There are all sorts of good reasons to abstain from voting, but the preposterous notion that there isn’t much difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney isn’t one of them.

Republicans would probably be more inclined to give an ear to campaign advice from people who had — stay with me here — a good record for winning elections. The anti-McConnell gang took its run with Matt Bevin in the primary and got beat like a pack of circus monkeys. Louis Gohmert made his run against John Boehner for the speakership, and there he sits. These were both fine projects — primary challenges and leadership challenges are positive developments that should generally be welcomed — but they were losers. On the other hand, the campaigns to elevate Ted Cruz over David Dewhurst and Marco Rubio over Charlie Crist — insurgencies that were supported by a lot of the same Establishment leaders and institutions abominated by the WHINOS — were successful. They were so successful, in fact, that Rubio and Cruz immediately became faces of the Establishment that we are informed is so despicable...

Still more.

For some reason Williamson thinks conservative attacks on the establishment are overwrought, and hence support for Donald Trump is totally fringe. This misses the key point: Trump is talking about things the GOP establishment will not. Or at least, Trump focuses on those elements in the debate that the GOP would rather avoid. Specifically, by hammering illegal immigration from the perspective illegal alien crime, Trump risks alienating Latinos. The GOP establishment doesn't want to talk about anything that's going to alienate Latinos, hence they don't want to talk about illegal immigrant crime. Conservatives, and likely independents too, aren't pleased with the establishment because they won't deal with issues on their terms. Republicans are going to deal with the issues on Democrat terms, and the Democrats will always win when you play ball constantly on defense.

It's like Rick Moran pointed out yesterday: Donald Trump would be foolish to stop talking about illegal immigration, simply because that's what's igniting his prairie fire. Unfortunately for establishment Republicans, the longer they ignore the visceral concerns of the "base" on illegal immigration, the more they'll be working to help the Democrats in 2016.

Greece Crisis: Cracks Appear In Franco-German Axis as European Leaders Remain Divided Over Country's Fate

Oh boy.

And here I thought they had a breakthrough at the end of last week.

Looks like Merkel's standing firm against no easy Greek bailout.

Guten Tag!

At the Telegraph UK, "French president Francois Hollande dismisses idea of temporary Greek exit as Slovakia and Finland say little chance of a deal today after EU leaders summit is cancelled."



Also at Euronews, "Eurozone leaders are telling Greece it has to restore trust by enacting key reforms before talks can open on a new financial rescue package to keep it in the single currency."

Margaret Brennan Status Report on Iran Nuclear Talks

At CBS News:



And see the New York Times, "Iran Nuclear Talks Are Nearing a Deal, Diplomats Say."

All New Kindle Paperwhite at Amazon

For your summer reading, Shop Amazon - ALL-New Kindle Paperwhite - For Reading, Tablets Can't Compete.

You can read Harper Lee on Kindle, Go Set a Watchman: A Novel.

Trump Would Be a Fool to Stop Talking About Illegal Immigration

From Rick Moran, at Pajamas:

Donald Trump has shot into a tie for the lead with Jeb Bush in the GOP presidential nomination sweepstakes almost exclusively because he has deliberately raised the temperature on one issue: illegal immigration.

What’s more, he is forcing other candidates from both parties to address the issue. He may be using bombastic language and questionable statistics, but there is no denying he has drawn a clear, unequivocal line between Republicans and Democrats on the issue.

So why do some Republicans want Trump to stop talking about illegal immigration?

Americans mostly support the Republican view of illegal immigration — with some important distinctions. A majority support a pathway to legal status for illegals but a larger majority support stepped-up border security. And those who support a pathway to legal status do not support a pathway to citizenship.

Of course, there are some Republicans wringing their hands over Trump’s exaggerations and even outright falsehoods. Why bother? It’s ridiculous to assume that the Republican candidate for president in 2016 will get more than 25-30% of the Hispanic vote. But drawing a stark distinction between the two parties on what could be a decisive issue in the presidential election could bring more conservatives to the polls and attract a few more independents...

Keep reading.

Trump's taking it to the establishment, both left and right. But I particularly like how he's exposing leftist support for illegal immigration sanctuaries. He's exposing the Democrats as the party of death.

It's who they are. It's what they do.

Atticus Finch Defends Jim Crow in 'Go Set a Watchman'

Well, with all these newspaper blurbs for Harper Lee's new novel, it's not like the plot's going to be a surprise.

I've been seeing tweets all week saying that Atticus defends the racist Jim Crow system, or some such thing.

So here's the review at the New York Times, "Review: Harper Lee’s ‘Go Set a Watchman’ Gives Atticus Finch a Dark Side":

We remember Atticus Finch in Harper Lee’s 1960 classic, “To Kill a Mockingbird,” as that novel’s moral conscience: kind, wise, honorable, an avatar of integrity who used his gifts as a lawyer to defend a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman in a small Alabama town filled with prejudice and hatred in the 1930s. As indelibly played by Gregory Peck in the 1962 movie, he was the perfect man — the ideal father and a principled idealist, an enlightened, almost saintly believer in justice and fairness. In real life, people named their children after Atticus. People went to law school and became lawyers because of Atticus.

Shockingly, in Ms. Lee’s long-awaited novel, “Go Set a Watchman” (due out Tuesday), Atticus is a racist who once attended a Klan meeting, who says things like “The Negroes down here are still in their childhood as a people.” Or asks his daughter: “Do you want Negroes by the carload in our schools and churches and theaters? Do you want them in our world?”

In “Mockingbird,” a book once described by Oprah Winfrey as “our national novel,” Atticus praised American courts as “the great levelers,” dedicated to the proposition that “all men are created equal.” In “Watchman,” set in the 1950s in the era of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, he denounces the Supreme Court, says he wants his home state “to be left alone to keep house without advice from the N.A.A.C.P.” and describes N.A.A.C.P.-paid lawyers as “standing around like buzzards.”

In “Mockingbird,” Atticus was a role model for his children, Scout and Jem — their North Star, their hero, the most potent moral force in their lives. In “Watchman,” he becomes the source of grievous pain and disillusionment for the 26-year-old Scout (or Jean Louise, as she’s now known).

While written in the third person, “Watchman” reflects a grown-up Scout’s point of view: The novel is the story of how she returns home to Maycomb, Ala., for a visit — from New York City, where she has been living — and tries to grapple with her dismaying realization that Atticus and her longtime boyfriend, Henry Clinton, both have abhorrent views on race and segregation.

Though “Watchman” is being published for the first time now, it was essentially an early version of “Mockingbird.” According to news accounts, “Watchman” was submitted to publishers in the summer of 1957; after her editor asked for a rewrite focusing on Scout’s girlhood two decades earlier, Ms. Lee spent some two years reworking the story, which became “Mockingbird.”

Some plot points that have become touchstones in “Mockingbird” are evident in the earlier “Watchman.” Scout’s older brother, Jem, vividly alive as a boy in “Mockingbird,” is dead in “Watchman”; the trial of a black man accused of raping a young white woman, while a main story line in “Mockingbird,” is only a passing aside in “Watchman.” (Interestingly, the trial results in a guilty verdict for the accused man, Tom Robinson, in “Mockingbird,” but leads to an acquittal in “Watchman.”)

Students of writing will find “Watchman” fascinating for these reasons: How did a lumpy tale about a young woman’s grief over her discovery of her father’s bigoted views evolve into a classic coming-of-age story about two children and their devoted widower father? How did a distressing narrative filled with characters spouting hate speech (from the casually patronizing to the disgustingly grotesque — and presumably meant to capture the extreme prejudice that could exist in small towns in the Deep South in the 1950s) mutate into a redemptive novel associated with the civil rights movement, hailed, in the words of the former civil rights activist and congressman Andrew Young, for giving us “a sense of emerging humanism and decency”?

How did a story about the discovery of evil views in a revered parent turn into a universal parable about the loss of innocence — both the inevitable loss of innocence that children experience in becoming aware of the complexities of grown-up life and a cruel world’s destruction of innocence (symbolized by the mockingbird and represented by Tom Robinson and the reclusive outsider Boo Radley)?

The depiction of Atticus in “Watchman” makes for disturbing reading, and for “Mockingbird” fans, it’s especially disorienting...

Still more at the link.

And buy the novel, at Amazon, Go Set a Watchman: A Novel.

I'm just going to read it for myself.