News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Today, I’d like to discuss the hysterical, absurd, and truly looney response that many in the media had to it.
Throughout his speech, President Trump did a wonderful job highlighting the strong, enduring relationships the United States has with Poland and our NATO allies, the tremendous importance of maintaining these relationships, and the need to band together to defeat ISIS and other enemies of Western civilization.
To any normal American, the speech was likely reminiscent of President Ronald Reagan’s address to the British Parliament in 1982 or speeches made by Sir Winston Churchill and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt during the World War II era.
But the leftwing media saw something entirely different.
One article in The Atlantic described the speech as “racial and religious paranoia,” saying “to be considered Western, a country must be largely Christian (preferably Protestant or Catholic) and largely white.” Then, I suppose to support its faulty thesis, the article wrongly suggests that there’s some confusion about whether Latin American countries are a part of Western civilization – saying while they are mostly Christian, “by U.S. standards, they’re not clearly white.”
This is a perfect example of the writer creating a false definition, then projecting it upon Latin America. He ignores that modern Latin American civilization was developed by settlers from Western Europe and that the leader of the Catholic Church (a cornerstone of Western culture) is from Argentina. This is either profoundly ignorant or delusional.
A story for Vox Media called the speech “an alt-right manifesto” because Trump urged NATO allies to “fight like the Poles – for family, for freedom, for country, and for God.” Those seem like pretty normal American values to me. After all, it’s the Declaration of Independence that states Americans “hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” It makes me wonder if these words penned by Thomas Jefferson would be considered alt-right, by Vox’s definition.
A writer at Slate claimed Trump’s only definable ideology was “white American chauvinism” and said the speech in Warsaw, “fit comfortably into a long history of white nationalist rhetoric.” Really? The editors at Slate must have missed when the President said that “above all, we value the dignity of every human life, protect the rights of every person, and share the hope of every soul to live in freedom.”
The truth is, the media is so frenzied in its disdain for the President, it is operating in a distorted version of reality. As I explain in my #1 New York Times best-selling book, Understanding Trump, members of the media cannot accept that the American people chose Donald Trump to represent them, so they have turned to a false world of facts in an effort to wage war on the White House. They might find it useful, however, to consider what President Reagan said to the British Parliament in 1982: “self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly.”
While it is not surprising that the media attacked President Trump’s Warsaw speech – they were committed to doing that regardless of what he said – the offensive against Western civilization is simply baffling.
Western civilization grew out of centuries of spiritual and intellectual thought going back to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome. It has produced foundational documents such as the Magna Carta – part of the bedrock for our concept that all people are equal under the law.
To suggest that Western civilization is racist or intolerant, is to deny the fabric by which our modern society has evolved – particularly in the United States. The effects of Western civilization on the world have amounted to a continual pattern of technological advancement, the creation of free markets, healthy competition, enforcement of the rule of law, and the promotion of freedom of thought.
This last hallmark points to the most absurd aspect of the media railing against Western civilization: Without it, there is no free press.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, commentary, hysterical absurdity, modern media, President Donald TrumpTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
The Senate Healthcare Bill Is The Right Bill At The Right Time To Begin The End Of Obamacare And Rescue The American People From This Failed Policy’
PRESIDENT TRUMP: ‘The Senate Is Going To Vote On Legislation To Save Americans From The Obamacare Disaster’
PRESIDENT TRUMP:“Next week, the Senate is going to vote on legislation to save Americans from the Obamacare disaster. Obamacare has wreaked havoc on American lives, and if we don’t replace it, the calamity will only get worse – and I mean, get worse by a lot. … I am pleased to report that we are very, very close to ending this healthcare nightmare – we are so close.”(President Trump, Weekly Address, 7/14/17)
PRESIDENT TRUMP: “The Senate health care bill stops the Obamacare disaster, expands choice, and drives down costs – and I want to tell you the Republican Senators are working very hard to get something that’s going to be really, really good – the opposite of the big lie which was Obamacare.” (President Trump, Weekly Address, 7/14/17)
VP PENCE: ‘The Bill Introduced In The Senate Puts America Back On The Path To Better, More Affordable Healthcare For Every American
VICE PRESIDENT PENCE: “I’m pleased to report, as you already know, just yesterday Senate leadership unveiled a new version of the Senate healthcare bill, and President Trump and I urge every member of the Senate to support it. President Trump and I believe the Senate healthcare bill is the right bill at the right time to begin the end of Obamacare and rescue the American people from this failed policy. And we look forward to the Senate taking up this bill as early as next week. The bill introduced in the Senate puts America back on the path to better, more affordable healthcare for every American. The Senate healthcare bill repeals Obamacare’s individual and business mandates, and cuts taxes on American families and American businesses, restoring freedom and it will create jobs.” (Vice President Pence, Remarks At The National Governors Association Summer Meeting, 7/14/17)
VP PENCE: “The bottom line: That the Senate healthcare act provides for the most vulnerable in our society. It improves and strengthens Medicaid. It gives you, America’s governors, the flexibility you need to bring better care, better coverage, and better outcomes to the citizens of your states. The President and I truly believe it will be a historic day for American healthcare when the President has the privilege to sign this bill into law.”(Vice President Pence, Remarks At The National Governors Association Summer Meeting, 7/14/17)
VP PENCE: “The Senate healthcare bill doubles the contribution limits for health savings accounts. And for the first time ever, it allows health savings accounts to cover insurance premiums. The bill also offers tax credits to help Americans buy the coverage they want at a price they can afford. … And if you take nothing else from what I say today, know that the Senate healthcare bill gives states the freedom to redesign your health insurance markets. And, most significantly, under this legislation, states across the country will have an unprecedented level of flexibility to reform Medicaid and bring better coverage, better care, and better outcomes to the most vulnerable in your states.” (Vice President Pence, Remarks At The National Governors Association Summer Meeting, 7/14/17)
SEN. CORNYN: ‘Next Week, The Choice Before The Senate Will Be Clear. We Can Let Obamacare Continue To Harm Millions … Or We Can Help Deliver Better Care’
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX):“These changes are the result of constructive discussions and additional input from our conference over the past two weeks. Members on both sides of the aisle will also have an opportunity to offer their ideas for reform once the Senate moves to debate the bill. Next week, the choice before the Senate will be clear. We can let Obamacare continue to harm millions of families and small businesses, or we can help deliver better care that's more affordable without government mandates.”(Sen. Cornyn, Press Release, 7/13/2017)
SEN. ENZI: ‘The Journey To A Better American Health Care System Begins Here’
SEN. MIKE ENZI (R-WY):“I don’t know many people who think our health care status quo should be left in place. We need to make changes.We shared a draft a few weeks ago for everyone to see. We’ve listened and made revisions. All senators will have a chance to offer further changes in an open amendment process. This is how legislating works.”(Sen. Enzi, Press Release, 7/13/2017)
SEN. HATCH: ‘You Should… Want To Have A Debate On This Bill’
SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): “Today, the Majority Leader unveiled a revised discussion draft for legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare. … The next vote on this legislation will presumably be whether to let the Senate proceed to the bill. Regardless of your position on this particular draft, if you support the larger effort to repeal and replace Obamacare, you should, at the very least, want to have a debate on this bill. Under the rules, we’ll have an open amendment process. Members will get a chance to make their preferences known and to have the Senate vote on them. Taking that opportunity is the very least we can do.” (Sen. Hatch, Floor Remarks, 7/13/2017)
SEN. CRUZ: ‘I Will Continue To Work Closely With My Colleagues To Unite Our Conference Around A Bill That Can Pass’<
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): “For nearly five months, I have been working closely with my Senate colleagues from across the ideological spectrum to honor our commitment to voters, to provide more choices for consumers, put people in control of their healthcare, and most importantly, lower health insurance premiums.I am encouraged that the revised bill ensures consumers have the freedom to choose among more affordable plans that are tailored to their individual healthcare needs, and expands health savings accounts so that consumers can pay health insurance premiums on a pre-tax basis. This is a critical step in the right directionand I will continue to work closely with my colleagues to unite our conference around a bill that can pass, and that honors our promises and that truly lowers premiums, which is crucial to providing relief from Obamacare.” (Sen. Cruz, Press Release, 7/13/2017)
‘Few Votes Will Reveal More About The Principles And Character Of This Congress’
WSJ:“Once Senators have time to inspect the new bill, better to vote for the motion to proceed and bring the legislation to the floor. That will start a robust debate and the amendment process. Every idea will get a vote and the public can see which command a majority. Republicans are fast approaching a binary choice. They can either repeal and replace ObamaCare with a center-right reform, or they can collapse in failure…”(Editorial, “ObamaCare Freedom and Failure Options,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/13/17)
NATIONAL REVIEW: “The Senate Health-Care Bill Is a Step in the Right Direction… bill cuts taxes, restrains spending, and — courtesy of the tireless efforts of Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee — modestly deregulates. It ends Obamacare’s obnoxious fines on people who go without health insurance. It would be likely to yield lower premiums than keeping Obamacare as it is — although supporters of the bill should be careful not to promise too much on this front. Its Medicaid reforms would control the growth of that program, give states a stronger incentive to police fraud and seek efficiency, equalize funding between Medicaid’s new beneficiaries and its poorer traditional ones, and provide some help for people who wish to move from Medicaid to private insurance. It could produce a larger individual insurance market by attracting a greater number of young, healthy people who voluntarily choose to enter it.” (Editorial, “The Senate Health-Care Bill Is A Step In The Right Direction,” National Review, 7/17/17) Tags:Better Care, ‘Begin The End Of Obamacare’To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Captured Tunisian ISIS Fighter Confesses Muslim Brotherhood Encouraged Jihad in Syria
by Patrick Poole: A 34-year-old Tunisian ISIS fighter captured by Kurdish forces in Raqaa recently spoke to reporter Jenan Moussa of Al-Aan TV. When asked why he had joined the terrorist organization, the fighter confessed that Ennahda -- the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate in Tunisia -- had encouraged young fighters to join the jihad in Syria.
It's not a coincidence, then, that Tunisia had the largest number of foreign fighters in Syria.
This deflates much of the U.S. think-tank and media establishment narrative that the Muslim Brotherhood serves as a "firewall" against jihadist groups:
She explains that during her two-hour interview with the captured ISIS fighter, they covered how he got to Syria, the travails of one American ISIS operative, and how he now wants to return to living with his wife and kids. He also explained that his motivation for joining ISIS was that the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia -- which was the majority party in the government at that time -- actively encouraged fighters to go to Syria and allowed that message in the mosques:
1/ #BREAK I gained access to ISIS prisoners captured by Kurds in Raqqa. 1 of them Tunisian ISIS member who knows US + German ISIS-fighters 👇 https://t.co/ioxblCo9RO
It's remarkable that he claims they were promised no repercussions upon their return to Tunisia. The returning jihadist fighter problem is one vexing Tunisia, as well as a number of other countries (including the U.S.) with large numbers of citizens who fought in Syria:
Going back to May 2013, the secular opposition parties charged Ennahda with encouraging the recruitment of fighters for Syria and looking the other way when they traveled:
VIDEO: The Tunisian fighters in Syria: Young jihadists from Tunisia are entering Syria to join the rebels batt... http://t.co/7X9BBSxanf
Mohammad, the son of retired Tunisian army officer Amin al-Susi, “emigrated” to Syria to “wage jihad.”
When his father went to see Rachid Ghannouchi, leader of the Islamist Ennahda Movement, accompanied by another family whose son also went to Syria, Ghannouchi told them: “It is better for your son to die in Syria than here. He will be a martyr and he will mediate for you on Judgment Day. Fighting Bashar al-Assad is better than staying here.”
Susi stresses that what Ghannouchi said to the two families, who had gone to him for help getting their sons back, reopens the case of Ennahda’s responsibility for the growth of the phenomenon of Tunisians going abroad to fight while the party held power. Despite the fact that Ennahda does not actively participate in sending young people to Syria, and despite the fact that its support bases have remained uninvolved in “emigration for jihad,” a comprehensive Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated ring has been involved. This involvement took place in Tunisia, Libya and Turkey, and the Muslim Brotherhood has long and influential arms in those three countries.I reported here at PJ Media last month about recent reports implicating Rachid al-Ghannouchi in the assassination of one of his top rivals:
It was not just the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia that was involved in encouraging jihadists to go to Syria. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood spokesman-turned Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi encouraged such recruitment. Just weeks into his tenure, Morsi was encouraging fighters to travel to Syria during a summit of non-aligned countries in Tehran:
And on June 16, 2013, he led a rally at a Cairo stadium filled with clerics engaged in anti-Shia rhetoric openly calling for jihadists to fight a holy war:
— The Times of Israel (@TimesofIsrael) June 16, 2013
The Associated Press reported on the rally:On Saturday, Morsi attended a rally by hard-line clerics who have called for jihad and spoke before a cheering crowd at a Cairo stadium, mainly Islamists. Waving a flag of Egypt and the Syrian opposition, he ripped into the Syrian regime, announced Egypt was cutting ties with Damascus and denounced Lebanon's Shiite Hezbollah guerrillas for fighting alongside Assad's forces.
Clerics at the rally urged Morsi to back their calls for jihad to support rebels. Morsi did not address their calls and did not mention jihad. But his appearance was seen as in implicit backing of the clerics' message. It came after a senior presidential aide last week said that while Egypt was not encouraging citizens to travel to Syria to help rebels, they were free to do so and the state would take no action against them.
Khalil el-Anani, an Egyptian expert on Islamist groups, called the move "Morsi's endorsement of jihad in Syria" and warned it was "a strategic mistake that will create a new Afghanistan in the Middle East."
"He is pushing Egypt into a sectarian war in which we have no interest," he said.
The new tone in Egypt risks fueling the flow of Egyptian jihadi fighters to Syria, where the conflict is already increasingly defined by the sectarian divide, with the mostly Sunni rebels fighting a regime rooted in the minority Alawite sect, an off-shoot of Shiite Islam, and backed by Shiite Iran and Hezbollah.>Morsi's rally was reportedly one of the main reasons that the leadership of the Egyptian army turned against him following massive anti-Morsi protests a few weeks later, which prompted his removal by the army:
In Qatar, senior Muslim Brotherhood clerics, including their top jurist Yusuf al-Qaradawi, held rallies calling for jihad in Syria:Members of the opposition Syrian National Council, which has been meeting in the capital Doha, joined the rally by several hundred people after the main weekly Muslim prayers, an AFP correspondent reported.
Qaradawi told demonstrators that the rally was aimed at “supporting the people of Syria,” where more than 6,000 people have been killed since pro-democracy protests erupted in March last year, according to activists.
The Sunni cleric called on Syrian troops ordered to take part in the government’s deadly crackdown to “align with the people and let go of the regime.”
Another leading member of Qaradawi’s grouping, Salahudin Sultan, appealed to Gulf leaders to arm rebel fighters in Syria and send troops to back them.
“King of Saudi Arabia, emir of Qatar, take out the weapons and hand them over to those free people,” Sultan said.If Salah Sultan mentioned in the article sounds familiar to PJ Media readers, it's because he's my former Ohio neighbor whom I've reported on frequently over the years:
A Blast From My Past ➤ Yes, my former neighbor really was a racist, terror supporting Muslim Brotherhood cleric https://t.co/QD8Qa4b0ic
With the defeat of ISIS in its two Syrian and Iraqi strongholds of Raqqa and Mosul, we can expect more information to come out about the various forces behind the terror groups and stories from the foreign fighters that joined them, including the role of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The ongoing crisis among Arab countries over Qatar's role in financing terrorism is also exposing the connections of the Muslim Brotherhood to the international terror networks:
But as the "moderate Muslim Brotherhood" myth continues to unravel and pressure continues to build for designating the group as a terrorist organization -- as many other American allies already have -- we shouldn't expect to see any wavering of support by the Washington, D.C. think tanks or the establishment media. Despite the growing evidence to the contrary, they will most likely hold on to the Muslim Brotherhood talking points more devoutly than any religious creed.
------------------------- Patrick Poole (@pspoole) is a national security and terrorism correspondent for PJMedia. Tags:Captured, Tunisian, ISIS Fighter, Confesses, Muslim Brotherhood, Encouraged, Jihad, in Syria, Patrick Poole, PJMediaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
As you know, Hillary Clinton's campaign was haunted by scandal, not related to Russia, but her own attempts to avoid State Department regulations regarding the handling of sensitive communications. She maintained an eye-popping number of unsecured devices -- private servers, laptops, iPads, Blackberries -- from which she sent thousands of emails that she did not want others to see.
When investigators attempted to gain access to Clinton's emails, she and her lawyers engaged in an extraordinary effort to conceal them.
I'm surprised she never tried the excuse, "My dog ate my emails."
In legal parlance all of this behavior relates to what prosecutors (not named Comey) would call "intent." Clearly, her intent was to hide communications that many believe would incriminate her for exploiting her government office to benefit the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
By the way, she did all of this as a former first lady, former senator and lawyer in her mid-to-late 60s who has had an eye on the presidency ever since she graduated college.
Now let's compare that to the current controversy involving Donald Trump Jr., a 39-year old real estate executive who grew up in a family that had nothing to do with politics.
He finds himself in the middle of a presidential campaign, something you can't imagine unless you have done it (and I have). His father is shocking everyone with his success. Don Jr. gets an email suggesting that a lawyer from Russia may have incriminating information on Hillary Clinton.
If you believe that talking to this lawyer is illegal, would you engage in the email chain he wrote?
Would you ask other key people in the campaign to join you?
After big media makes Russian collusion a big theme, would you leave the emails on your computer?
Donald Trump Jr. is not guilty of collusion. He is guilty of not understanding how the far left will go to criminalize politics.
Left-wing Hate - Earlier this week, ABC News reported that Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke at a closed-door meeting of a "hate group." ABC's report was a disgusting smear against the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), one of the finest Christian legal defense organizations in America. ABC based its information about ADF on a radical left-wing group called the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
The SPLC is a hate group. It hates Christians who resist being forced to violate their deeply held beliefs.
The SPLC labeled the Family Research Council (FRC), which I led for ten years, as a hate group. Emboldened by the SPLC's hateful rhetoric, a deranged leftist attacked FRC and shot a security guard.
While we're on the subject of religious bigotry, you may recall that I was at the White House Monday. Well, apparently one CNN anchor found our prayers for President Trump "pretty stunning" and "very strang."
What is stunning and strange is the left's disconnect with Americans who take our faith seriously.
My friends, we have to fight back against the left's extremism. Share these reports with friends and family members. And please support our efforts to defend faith, family and freedom!
A Tolerance For Dead Jews - Two Israeli police officers were shot and killed today at the Temple Mount, one of the most revered Jewish holy sites. Their attackers -- three Palestinians described as "devout men who loved Allah" -- were shot and killed in the gun battle that erupted.
Incredibly, there are serious people in Washington, D.C., who believe that Israel should prove its desire for peace by giving half of Jerusalem to the same society that produced these murderers.
The media's coverage of today's Temple Mount atrocity is also telling. If some idiot leaves a pack of bacon at a mosque door it becomes an international incident with the FBI investigating it as a "hate crime." Believe it or not, they are even investigating a picture of Jesus left at a mosque as a "hate crime."
If a similar event to today's Jerusalem shooting had occurred in London, Paris or Brussels, the death of the police officers would be big news. But to the left-wing world media, the Palestinians are "occupied people" and the Jews deserve whatever they get. Once again, we see how much of the world has a high tolerance for dead Jews.
A few weeks ago, Hadas Malka, a 23 year-old female Israeli border guard, was stabbed to death near the same area in Jerusalem. Her attackers were shot and killed by Israeli officers before they could kill anyone else. There was very little news about the murder.
But even worse, not in Ramallah, not in Damascus, not in Tehran, but on multiple U.S. campuses, a Palestinian student association referred to the shootings of Malka's attackers as "executions" of "Palestinian teens" carried out by "Zionist occupation force."
I am proud to lead Christians United For Israel's Washington, D.C., office. Because of that work, I am very familiar with CUFI on Campus and the young men and women who take on radical student groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine, and their increasingly violent left-wing allies on campuses all over America. I am proud to be speaking to CUFI on Campus this Sunday, just as Christians United For Israel's annual Washington Summit gets underway.
The administration is shutting down Obama-era immigration loopholes.
The Administration is aggressively tackling visa overstays.
More Christian refugees are coming to America. Thank you, President Trump!
------------------- Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, Clinton vs. Trump Jr., Left-wing Hate, Tolerance For Dead Jews, Other HeadlinesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
House Appropriations Committee Allows DACA Amnesty Recipients to Compete with Americans for Federal Jobs
Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA)
by NumbersUSA: The House Appropriations Committee approved an amendment late Thursday night that would allow illegal aliens who receive the unconstitutional DACA executive amnesty to compete with American workers for jobs with the federal government. The amendment, offered by Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), was part of the FY18 Financial Services and General Government spending bill and was passed by a voice vote.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Randy Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) allowed the voice vote to take place. Some committee members were reported to have appealed for a recorded vote by Chairman Frelinghuysen who denied them.
NumbersUSA President Roy Beck said all Members on the committee would have to shoulder responsibility for the "DACA Federal Jobs Amnesty" unless they publicly stated their opposition and were able to claim that they were among those who tried to persuade Rep. Frelinghuysen to take a roll call vote for the public record.
It was assumed that adding the amnesty to the bill was supported by Rep. Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tom Graves (R-Ga.) since it was his bill and he made no public statement of opposition when the committee put out a press release bragging about including the amnesty amendment. But Rep. Graves put out a statement late Friday about the amnesty amendment:I spoke against this amendment, voted against it and urged all other committee members to vote against it. And I'm already working get it stripped from the bill when it comes to the House Floor." -- Rep. Tom GravesAccording to the federal government job bank website, USAJobs.gov, generally only U.S. citizens are qualified for federal government jobs, but the approval by the Appropriations Committee would allow an exception for DACA amnesty recipients who are both non-citizens and illegal aliens. The amendment would also allow DACA amnesty recipients to work for Members of Congress on Capitol Hill.
According to a recent USCIS report, 787,580 illegal aliens have received DACA approval since the program was created in 2012. Over 100,000 DACA applications were approved in just the first three months of 2017.
Despite his campaign promise to end DACA on his first day in office, Pres. Trump has not taken any action on the DACA program. He specifically excluded DACA from his January executive order, which ordered a review of all the Obama-era immigration orders.
This approval comes as a coalition of 10 states that challenged DAPA are threatening to extend their lawsuit to include DACA if the Trump administration does not begin to phase out the program by September 5th. DHS Secretary John Kelly has said that according to their lawyers DACA would probably not survive the lawsuit.
Roy Beck, President of NumbersUSA, released this statement on the amendment early Friday afternoon:Taxpayers will be outraged to learn that the House Appropriations Committee has voted to use their tax dollars to pay the salaries of illegal aliens who the committee decided should be able to compete with Americans for federal jobs. With the work-force participation rate for American millennials remaining abysmally low, the chance of landing a job with the government would be made still more difficult by the Republican-led committee's decision to make them compete with the some 800,000 young-adult recipients of the unconstitutional executive DACA amnesty. So much for Republican promises of making decisions that put American workers first.”You can read the full text of the spending bill and amendment here. Tags:Obama's executive amnesties,Rewards for Illegal Aliens,Pete Aguilar,Tom Graves, Rodney Frelinghuysen, NumbersUSA, Roy BeckTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Taxpayer Support For Palestinian Terrorist Salaries Becoming Impossible To Defend
. . . Governments around the world get closer to turning off the money pipeline.
by Edwin Black: The issue of government subsidies for Palestinian terrorist salaries is again in the international spotlight. What began in November 2013, as a barely believable revelation — that taxpayers in Great Britain, the US, and other Western nations were bankrolling terrorist salaries — has now become a universally-acknowledged, impossible-to-deny, and impossible-to-defend embarrassment for governments.
For years, officials dissembled and dodged when the question came up. After a period of silent disbelief, the mainstream media now openly confirms the salaries and routinely refers to the program with ipso factuality. Political challengers on both sides of the Atlantic stridently demand that incumbents terminate foreign aid that amounts to taxpayer-incentivized terrorism. A recent in-depth study in Israel calculates that all terror incentives and rewards paid by the Palestinian Authority over the past four years total a mind-numbing one billion dollars.
As more citizens are victimized in Great Britain, Europe, the U.S. and elsewhere, Western donor governments find their financial involvement with the Palestinian Authority terrorist salary program increasingly indefensible.
Whether things might be changing is anyone’s guess.
Intense public pushback and the spread of terrorism, from “something over in Israel” to atrocities in leading European and American cities, have cracked entrenched governmental refusals to stop the financing. But it has been a long road.
In November 2013, revelations first leapt into global headlines that convicted Palestinian terrorists were receiving monthly salaries paid by the Palestinian Authority using foreign donor funds. The Palestinian “Law of the Prisoner” openly rewards those convicted of even the most heinous attacks with generous monthly “salaries” and phantom jobs with automatic advancement in the PA government.
The salaries increase on a sliding scale. The more carnage inflicted, the longer the prisoner sentence, the higher the salary. Terrorists receiving a five-year sentence are granted just a few hundred dollars each month. The bloodiest murderers are paid as much $3,000 monthly. Checks are sent directly to the prisoner, who appoints a power of attorney to distribute the funds.
In 2013, the first spotlighted salary program operated by the Ministry of Prisoners was estimated to consume some $5 to $8 million monthly, with other benefit programs doubling that sum. In all, some 8 percent of the PA budget was diverted to terror. But that money was the tip of the cash pile.
The chronically bankrupt PA relies upon foreign aid to pay the salaries. and prioritizes the monies received into the salary program before any civic expenditures on health, welfare, education, or infrastructure programs. In every Western country, financial support for terrorism makes such funding illegal. Yet, the UK, EU, and the US, through their fungible aid, effectively act as the chief bankers of the terrorist salaries. Thin attempts by government paymasters in various countries sought to portray the monies not as “salaries” but as “welfare.” Ironically, the PA itself vigorously refuted that claim, bragging that such payments are proud rewards to its cherished fighters, including the type of terrorist that would slash the throat of children in their kibbutz beds. Indeed, the term for the payments is rawatib, which in Arabic does not mean “welfare” — it means “salaries.”
Shortly after the 2013 disclosures, Rep. Trent Franks of the House Terrorism, Non-Proliferation, and Trade Subcommittee became one of the first to grasp the implications. He scheduled a formal hearing on the topic and loudly demanded that Washington cut all foreign aid to the PA. American foreign aid payments amount to roughly $400 million per year.
Likewise, in February 2014, after a House of Commons presentation, key MPs insisted that London halt the roughly £70 to £90 million annually donated to the PA by the British treasury. A formal hearing in the Canadian House of Commons and a session in the European Parliament yielded a similar outrage among a few key legislators.
But most other US, UK, and Canadian legislators were incredulous and felt the disclosures could not be true. No change occurred.
But after a fractious debate in the US, the first meaningful change in the terrorism reward status quo finally occurred. In mid-June 2014, a late-night compromise in Congress resulted in an unpublicized fiscal 2015 budget reduction. The last-minute insertion reduced “the amount of assistance … for the Palestinian Authority by an amount … equivalent to … payments to individuals and the families of such individuals that are imprisoned for acts of terrorism or who died committing such acts during the previous calendar year.”
Seeing $60 million or more disappearing from its coffers, the PA abolished the governmental Ministry of Prisoners, through which the salary payments were made, and began funneling the cash through an outside Palestine Liberation Organization agency known as the “Prisoners Authority.” The Prisoners Authority reports directly to PA president Mahmoud Abbas. Notably, the PA itself is subordinate to the PLO. A transparent re-routing of the same funding of terrorist salaries drawn from taxpayer funds changed nothing for taxpayers. Throughout 2015 and 2016, major media confirmations in the Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Wall Street Journal, and many other publications — undeniably tardy — confirmed what Jewish and pro-Israel groups had been calling out since 2013 with petitions, single-issue protest websites, advertisements, and litigation efforts.
An exploding universe of researchers, activists, NGOs, and Israeli officials joined the fray. These included the most vigilant Palestinian Media Watch, as well as StandWithUs and NGO Monitor. Each added a disclosure, study, or proof point to the edifice of undeniability.
In February 2015, a rare media intervention lawsuit (similar to a Freedom of Information action, but directed at private litigation) secured some 5,000 pages of US court-sealed PLO terror salary documents. The files proved that senior PA officials — including President Mahmoud Abbas himself — scrutinized the details of terrorist carnage before approving monthly salaries. PA leaders could no longer distance themselves from the salary program.
The first tectonic shift came in March 2016 at the AIPAC annual policy conference in Washington, DC. During the run-up to the conference, numerous pro-Israel groups, led by StandWithUs, reminded the candidates that terrorist salaries must be opposed. Their efforts paid off. Hour after hour, every candidate’s speech, from Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, loudly proclaimed that the PA must stop rewarding terrorists. From that moment on, the mumble and grumble became a public roar.
In September 2016, a group of leading Republicans introduced the Taylor Force Act, named for the 28-year-old Texas student who was killed by a terrorist while in Israel. The proposed Taylor Force Act, stuck in committee, would terminate all PA funding if payment of terrorist salaries continued. The measure has been a rallying call for pro-Jewish groups.
A second ground jolt occurred in October 2016, when British International Development Secretary Priti Patel briefly halted £25 million in aid to the PA, conceding it may have gone to pay terrorist salaries — a conclusion previously denied. Funding quickly resumed with the assurance that only regular PA employees would be paid. Ironically, many of the thousands of staffers on the PA’s employment payrolls hold phantom jobs awarded to convicted terrorists still sitting in Israeli prisons.
On November 1, 2016, just a week before the American election, former Israel intelligence officer Yossi Kuperwasser put all the numbers together for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He documented that the salaries, plus “martyr” payments to families, plus regular terror bonuses, including other related expenditures, had increased to $300 million per year. In the nearly four years since the original 2013 disclosures, the PA had spent a stunning one billion dollars on terror. In 2016, nearly 30 percent of all foreign money received was diverted to the cause of terror.
The true number actually exceeds one billion dollars if other diversions from education, sports, and security funds are tallied. Israel Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, called a press conference at the UN displaying a large poster declaring, “The Palestinian Authority has paid a $1,000,000,000 to terrorists.”
On May 3, 2017, the tense meeting between President Trump and President Abbas pivoted on terror issues. According to a White House statement, “President Trump raised his concerns about payments to Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails who have committed terrorist acts, and to their families, and emphasized the need to resolve this issue.”
On May 26, 2017, Norway’s Foreign Minister learned that a women’s center it funded was named for a notorious terrorist who massacred a bus full of passengers. Norway’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Børge Brende declared, “The glorification of terrorist attacks is completely unacceptable.” He demanded the money be repaid.
On June 3, 2017, 277 recently-released Hamas terrorists publicly complained that their salaries had been suspended to appease the Trump administration. Soon, Iran stepped in to provide a special subvention. Two days later, Kuperwasser published an analysis suggesting the PA may at last be genuinely be backing away from the salary program as a concession to Washington. But since, then, Palestinian public opinion, agitation by the Palestinian quasi-NGO “Prisoner’s Club,” and other public pressures have caused Abbas to openly deny the PA will ever stop paying prisoner salaries. When Trump senior advisor Jared Kushner met with Abbas in Ramallah on June 21, the session blew up over terrorist salaries. Abbas vehemently refused to curtail the payments.
As recently as July 2, Abbas publicly proclaimed, “Even if I will have to leave my position, I will not compromise on the salary (rawatib) of a Martyr (Shahid) or a prisoner.”
The next chapter in the saga of taxpayer-funded terrorism will be written by the policymakers of governmental paymasters, undoubtedly in blood.
----------------- Edwin Black is the bestselling author of IBM and the Holocaust, and Financing the Flames, which in November 2013 broke the terrorist salaries story worldwide. He filed suit to obtain some 5,000 court-sealed PA terror salary documents, and has testified or presented on the subject in five national legislatures. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service Tags:Edwin Black. FrontPag Mag, Hamas, Taxpayer Support, Palestinian Terrorist, Salaries, Becoming Impossible, To Defend To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Dem. Sen. Schumer Admits Obamacare Payments Violated The Constitution
Sen. Chuck Schumer
by Christopher Jacobs: Last week, one of Washington’s leading Democrats made what should be considered a stunning admission, yet few in the media bothered to notice, or care. In response to comments from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) about a potential bailout of Obamacare insurers, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said: “Democrats are eager to work with Republicans to stabilize the markets and improve [Obamacare]. At the top of the list should be ensuring cost-sharing payments are permanent, which will protect health care for millions.”
Schumer’s statement contradicts the Obama administration, which argued in federal court that the cost-sharing reductions are already permanent. It’s also an implicit admission that the Obama administration violated both the U.S. Constitution and federal criminal statutes by spending funds without an appropriation.
Some background on the matter at issue: Section 1302 of Obamacare requires health insurers to reduce cost-sharing (i.e., deductibles, co-payments, etc.) for certain low-income enrollees who buy silver plans on health insurance exchanges. The law directs the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to create a program to reimburse insurers for the cost of providing those cost-sharing discounts. But the text of the law does not actually disburse funds to HHS—or any other cabinet department—to make the reimbursement payments to insurers.
Not wanting to be bound by such niceties as the rule of law, the Obama administration started making the payments to insurers anyway, claiming the “text and structure” of Obamacare allowed them to do so. The House of Representatives sued, claiming a violation of its constitutional “power of the purse,” and last May, Judge Rosemary Collyer agreed, ruling that the administration violated the Constitution.
Schumer Admits Constitutional Violation
Schumer’s statement last Thursday stands out because the Obama administration and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have claimed, both in court and elsewhere, that Obamacare made a permanent appropriation for the cost-sharing payments. The law did no such thing, and a federal district court judge so ruled, but they attempted to argue that it did.
By conceding that Obamacare lacks a permanent appropriation for cost-sharing reductions, Schumer’s admission raises some interesting questions. The Obama administration requested an explicit appropriation for the cost-sharing reduction payments, a request Congress promptly denied. If there isn’t a permanent appropriation for cost-sharing payments in Obamacare—as Schumer admitted—then the Obama administration spent money without an appropriation.
The executive spending money without an appropriation not only violates Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution—“No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law”—but also the federal Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits federal employees from authorizing expenses in excess of available appropriations—which, according to Schumer’s logic, do not exist for the Obamacare cost-sharing reductions.
The Anti-Deficiency Act includes not just civil, but criminal, penalties: “An officer or employee of the United States Government or of the District of Columbia government knowingly and willfully violating [the Act] shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.”
By calling on Congress to “ensure” permanent cost-sharing reductions, Schumer has essentially admitted that President Obama violated the Constitution, and members of his administration may have violated federal criminal statutes by spending money without an appropriation. This prompts one other obvious question: When will Schumer endorse a special counsel to investigate these matters?
Don’t Endorse Law-Breaking
In deciding to pay the cost-sharing subsidies without an appropriation, the Obama administration and its allies have endorsed a strategy of ends justifying means: They wanted to provide health insurance to more Americans, therefore it was acceptable to violate the Constitution. And if the administration violated the Constitution long enough, and on a big enough scale, they could change the law to meet their will. Now that a federal court has ruled that President Obama did in fact violate the Constitution, that’s exactly what Pelosi and Schumer want to do: Change the law to accommodate the Obama administration’s law-breaking.
Conservatives shouldn’t buy it for a second. While liberals want the entire dispute to focus around ends—“Insurers must receive these payments, or millions of Americans will suffer!”—conservatives interested in the rule of law should focus on means: Did the administration violate the Constitution and federal criminal statutes, and who should be held responsible, and how?
Only after those weighty issues have been examined and adjudicated fully should Congress debate whether to appropriate funds for the cost-sharing reductions. To do otherwise would undermine the Constitution that members of Congress vowed to uphold, and further encourage the kind of flagrant law-breaking seen in the Obama administration.
-------------------------- Christopher Jacobs (@chrisjacobshc) is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group, a policy consulting firm based in Washington. He previously worked as Policy Director for America Next, a new start-up think tank, and as a Senior Policy Analyst for the Heritage Foundation and the Joint Economic Committee's Senate Republican staff. Tags:Christopher Jacobs, Juniper Research Group, Democrat, Sen. Schumer, Obamacare payments, violated, The ConstitutionTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
AP Style Book censors ‘pro-life,’ ‘terrorist,' and 'Islamist'
Joni B. Hannigan
by Joni B. Hannigan: For well over a century the Associated Press has operated with the use of a style guide that writers refer to as “The Journalist’s Bible.” With more than 200 million distributed since 1977, students, writers, editors and businesses have been instructed in grammar, punctuation and word choice.
The idea has been to “neutralize” words, or “depoliticize” concepts in order to present information to readers in a way that removes bias on the part of the reporter and clarifies issues.
A number of critics, including Rachel Alexander, said in an opinion piece for “The Hill,” that the opposite has been true in recent years.
“More often than not, style writers have been more interested in censoring conservative words while promoting language that liberals tend to favor,” Alexander said.
Pointing to the AP Stylebook – updated annually and available in print and online – Alexander noted the term “pro-life,” even if it is the choice of the writer, will be edited to reflect “pro-abortion.”
“"Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and pro-abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice,” the guide reads.
The nuances in the language are not likely accidental. Even a broad interpretation by Wikipedia of many of the terms used in the abortion debate references “political framing” – a process by which those with an agenda prefer one term rather than another to validate a particular stance while invalidating the opposition’s.
As far back as 1972, in Pubic Opinion Quarterly, Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw suggested the news media uses framing to set the public agenda in this way: “In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position.”
The AP Stylebook also tells writers which terms to avoid, Alexander said.
“Avoid abortionist,” the AP Stylebook reads, because the term “connotes a person who performs clandestine abortions.”
Other hot button words to steer clear of are “terrorist” and “Islamist,” instead using “lone wolf” or “attacker” – and replacing “migrant” or “refugee” with “people struggling to enter Europe.”
Even the word “controversial” is frowned upon, according to the AP, apparently because it is “overused” – although many news organizations conveniently use the descriptor to “describe conservatives and their issues,” Alexander said.
In addition to dictating gender-neutral changes from words like “spokesman” and “spokeswomen” to “spokesperson,” the AP Stylebook has prompted changes to expressions and words addressing topics such as climate change, guns, Republicans and fake news.
Referencing The New York Times, which has its own stylebook, Alexander notes its not much different than the AP guide.
“[H]ow can the mainstream media correct their bias, when the bias is already built into their stylebooks?” Alexander asks.
------------------ Shared by Todd Starnes (@toddstarnes) is A Christian Conservative, the host of Fox News & Commentary and heard daily on 250+ radio stations and on his iTune podcasts. He shared the above in his show by Joni B. Hannigan/Twitter Tags:Todd Starnes, Joni B. Hannigan, AP Style Book, censors pro-life, terrorist, IslamistTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Dr. Ed Feulner: “Drain the swamp!” It was the battle cry of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
Many Republican members of Congress echoed that call as well, riding it to victory—and control of both legislative chambers.
The American people rallied around the cry because it reinforced their impression of what Washington had become: a swamp infested with special-interest groups and power-hungry bureaucrats.
They rallied, too, because it held the promise of getting our country back on track—by reforming the tax code, repealing Obamacare, cutting spending, and eliminating the needless red tape that stifles entrepreneurship and innovation.
But more than five months into the new Congress and the new administration, precious little draining has occurred. The delay in action is not only frustrating, it’s expensive: With the promised reforms, the U.S. could have created as much as $5 billion per day in economic output. If nothing changes, the swamp will end up costing more than 2 million prospective jobs over the next decade.
Elites argue that piles of regulations and special rules keep everyone safe. But most Americans understand that these policies serve mainly to enrich special interests and keep upstart entrepreneurs from gaining a foothold.
All the regulation keeps new businesses from offering innovative goods and services at lower prices.
All too often, these regulatory schemes not only fail to protect consumers—they create huge problems, like financial crises and housing busts. And then the elites point to the problems as proof of the need for even further governmental intervention.
The bailouts lead to new programs and federal agencies and, of course, even more rules.
But most Americans don’t want more government. Rather, they want relief from big government so that they can make their own decisions and improve their own communities.
There is plenty of evidence that people thrive more under limited government than under a vastly more intrusive government.
Had the U.S. economy simply stayed on the same trend during the Obama years that it had followed over the previous 25 years, gross domestic product per person would be nearly 10 percent higher than it is now.
Instead, after years of ever-expanding government control and regulation, the economy dropped off a cliff in 2008.
Just getting back on the previous trend would be great, but Americans can do much better. At least three major reforms are now possible that can unleash the power of the American economy.
• Repeal Obamacare: A study by the National Center for Policy Analysis estimates that repealing Obamacare would provide a boost to real GDP of more than 1 percent per year over the next decade.
Based on these projections, personal income would increase by hundreds of billions annually, and the economy would add nearly 1 million jobs by the end of the decade.
A simple division by the number of days suggests that the cost of inaction is nearly $500 million per day in lost output. In terms of jobs, this could translate into as many as 250 lost jobs per day (a relatively small number unless one of those jobs is yours).
• Shrink Regulation: Admittedly, this is a herculean task. The federal government has been burdening people with innovation-killing rules for decades, and it is difficult to estimate the economic effects of a broad deregulation effort.
Two Heritage Foundation scholars have estimated the economic impact of reducing just one of the likely effects of Dodd-Frank: excess borrowing costs.
Their study projects that removing these excess costs would grow the GDP by more than 1 percent per year for the next decade, and boost capital stock by nearly 3 percent per year. Inaction on Dodd-Frank costs another $500 million per day.
• Reform the Tax Code: Estimates of tax reform benefits vary widely because there are so many ways to improve the U.S. tax system, but several plans are currently taking shape.
The Tax Foundation studied the House Republican plan and found that it would increase the long-run size of the economy (in terms of GDP) by more than 9 percent. It also projected that the Rubio-Lee plan would grow the economy by 15 percent over the long run.
Trump’s plan is not fully detailed yet, but a decent guess is that the benefits would be somewhere near these projections.
The increase in jobs, wages, and wealth from growing the economy through these types of tax reforms would be enormous. The cost of waiting on just tax reform can be conservatively estimated as approaching $2 billion per day in lost output.
Repealing Obamacare, rolling back the regulatory state, and implementing pro-growth tax reform would be a big shot in the arm to the U.S. economy. Over the next decade, the cumulative effect of making just those three reforms could boost GDP anywhere from $8 trillion to $18 trillion.
That translates to a cost of between roughly $2 billion and $5 billion for each day that Americans are denied these reforms. In terms of lost jobs, waiting costs nearly 1,000 jobs per day.
Some have said that because any legislative action taken this year wouldn’t take effect until at least Jan. 1, 2018, it doesn’t matter if it happens now or in September. False: The sooner investors and entrepreneurs can see the changes on the horizon, the quicker they can begin taking actions that benefit the economy.
A filled swamp is expensive to maintain. The American people are waiting for Congress to drain it. And they should expect their elected representatives to stay in Washington and make the real changes they were elected to do.
------------------ Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D. is the founder and president of The Heritage Foundation. Tags:Ed Feulner, THe Heritage Foundation, high cost, of waiting, Darin the SwampTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Patrick Buchanan: “Is Russia an enemy of the United States?” NBC’s Kasie Hunt demanded of Ted Cruz. Replied the runner-up for the GOP nomination, “Russia is a significant adversary. Putin is a KGB thug.”
To Hillary Clinton running mate Tim Kaine, the revelation that Donald Trump Jr., entertained an offer from the Russians for dirt on Clinton could be considered “treason.”
Treason is giving aid and comfort to an enemy in a time of war.
Are we really at war with Russia? Is Russia really our enemy?
“Why Russia is a Hostile Power” is the title of today’s editorial in The Washington Post that seeks to explain why Middle America should embrace the Russophobia of our capital city:
“Vladimir Putin adheres to a set of values that are antithetical to bedrock American values. He favors spheres of influence over self-determination; corruption over transparency; and repression over democracy.”
Yet, accommodating a sphere of influence for a great power is exactly what FDR and Churchill did with Stalin, and every president from Truman to George H. W. Bush did with the Soviet Union.
When East Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Poles rose up against Communist regimes, no U.S. president intervened. For those nations were on the other side of the Yalta line agreed to in 1945.
Bush I and James Baker even accused Ukrainians of “suicidal nationalism” for contemplating independence from Russia.
When did support for spheres of influence become un-American?
As for supporting “corruption over transparency,” ex-Georgia President Mikheil Saakashvili resigned in disgust as governor of Odessa in November, accusing Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, our man in Kiev, of supporting corruption.
As for favoring “repression over democracy,” would that not apply to our NATO ally President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, our Arab ally Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi of Egypt, and our Philippine ally Rodrigo Duterte? Were U.S. Cold War allies like the Shah of Iran and Gen. Augusto Pinochet of Chile all Jeffersonian Democrats? Have we forgotten our recent history?
The Post brought up the death in prison of lawyer-activist Sergei Magnitsky in 2009. Under the Magnitsky Act of 2012, Congress voted sanctions on Russia’s elites.
Yet China’s lone Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Liu Xiaobo, sentenced to 11 years in prison for championing democracy, died Thursday of liver cancer, with police in his hospital room. Communist dictator Xi Jinping, who makes Putin look like Justin Trudeau, would not let the dying man go.
Will Magnitsky Act sanctions be slammed on China? Don’t bet on it. Too much trade. Congress will do what comes naturally — kowtow. Yet our heroic Senate voted 98-2 to slam new sanctions on Russia.
What are the roots of this hostility to Russia and hatred of Putin, whom a Fox analyst called “as bad as Hitler”?
During the Cold War, every president sought detente with a USSR that was arguably the most blood-soaked regime of the century.
When the Cold War ended in December 1991, the Soviet Union had dissolved into 15 nations. Moscow had given up her empire, a third of her territory, and half the population of the USSR. Marxist-Leninist ideology was dead. An epochal change had taken place.
Yet hostility to Russia and hatred of Putin seem to exceed anything some of us remember from the worst days of the Cold War.
Putin’s Russia is called imperialist, though Estonia, next door, which Russia could swallow in one gulp, has been free for 25 years.
Russia invaded Georgia. Well, yes, after Georgia invaded the seceded province of South Ossetia and killed Russian peacekeepers.
Russia has taken back Crimea from Ukraine. True, but only after a U.S.-backed coup in Kiev replaced the elected pro-Russian regime.
Russia has intervened to back Bashar Assad in Syria. Yes, but only after our insurgent allies collaborated with al-Qaida and ISIS to bring him down. Is Russia not allowed to support an ally, recognized by the U.N., which provides its only naval base on the Med?
Russia has meddled in our election. And we have meddled in the affairs of half a dozen nations with “color-coded revolutions.” The cry of “regime change!” may daily be heard in the U.S. Capitol.
Putin is not Pope Francis. But he is not Stalin; he is not Hitler; he is not Mao; and Russia today is not the USSR. Putin is an autocrat cut from the same bolt of cloth as the Romanov czars.
His cooperation is crucial to the peace of the world, the freedom of the Baltic States, an end to the Syrian civil war, tranquility in the Persian Gulf, and solving the North Korean crisis.
While our tectonic plates may rub against one another, we are natural allies. The Russia of Tolstoy, Pushkin, Solzhenitsyn and the Orthodox Church belongs with the West.
If America stumbles into a war with Russia that all our Cold War presidents avoided, the Russia baiters and Putin haters will be put in same circle of hell by history as the idiot war hawks of 1914 and the three blind men of Versailles in 1919.
-------------------------- Patrick Buchanan is currently a conservative columnist, political analyst, chairman of The American Cause foundation and an editor of The American Conservative. He has been a senior advisor to three Presidents, a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and was the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000. He blogs at the Patrick J. Buchanan. Tags:Patrick Buchanan, conservative, commentary, Russia Baiters, Putin HatersTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
