Sunday, July 19, 2015

You could tell him...

When Voting

FLOP

FORGET

Lunacy

Exception

Repeat after me...

Sheriff Clarke: "Everything Obama Touches Tends to Turn to Crap".

http://www.breitbart.com ^ | 7/18/2015 | Trent Baker 

Speaking on Saturday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Justice with Judge Jeanine” regarding the shooting in Chattanooga, TN, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke (D) said that the United States needs a national strategy to “deal with the home-grown terrorist threat.” He also brought up that President Obama actually “gutted” the Department of Defense 1033 Program, which would have given the local law enforcement the military supplies to aid during a terrorist attack.
Clarke used Obama’s mistake of “gutting of the 1033 Program as an example of his problems as a president, saying that everything Obama does “just comes up wrong,” and “everything he touches tends to turn to crap.”
Earlier, Clarke argued, “We need a national strategy. We can’t have 10,000 disparate strategies in the United States to deal with with the homegrown terrorist threat. One of the things that would help us, and that the commander-in-chief, President Obama did not do — or what he did do, is he gutted the Department of Defense 1033 Program. That was a program that allowed law enforcement, local law enforcement, to use military surplus or to acquire military surplus, to respond to counter terrorism situations like we saw in Chattanooga. He gutted that.”
Clarke continued, “Everything that he does just comes up wrong. I’ve never seen a president like this, that everything he touch[es] tends to turn to crap. So, there are some things that we can do. I’m not going to sit on my hands and watch my community take on casualties from these homegrown terrorists, but we need a national strategy.”
Read more at:
Link to Breitbart
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Steinitz slams Kerry claim that better Iran deal was ‘fantasy’

Times of Israel ^ | 9:53 AM EDT | Tamar Pileggi 

Likud minister calls assessment by top US diplomat ‘baseless,’ says Tehran must be accountable for past actions
National Infrastructure Minister Yuval Steinitz on Sunday slammed remarks by US Secretary of State John Kerry, who over the weekend dismissed as “fantasy” the claim — raised by Israel and domestic US critics — that it was possible to have penned a better nuclear deal than the one signed by world powers and Iran last week.
“To the best of our professional assessment, these remarks are baseless,” Steinitz, who is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s point man on the Iranian nuclear threat, told Army Radio on Sunday.
“One can easily think of a better agreement in which, as is the international practice in such cases, Iran must reveal everything it has done in the past and not simply answer questions of procedure, which really ignores the issue,” he said.
Speaking on US television Friday, Kerry insisted that Israel that “will be safer” under the terms of the nuclear deal, and that the concept of a more stringent nuclear deal was unrealistic.
Kerry said that Netanyahu and other detractors of the deal had not offered an alternative, and promised to increase US support to Israel and America’s other Mideast allies.
“American security cooperation and help will only increase,” he promised. “President [Barack] Obama is prepared to upgrade that,” he told PBS.
Obama, he said, would be willing “to work to do more to be able to address specific concerns” Israel has over the details of the agreement, intended to curb Iran’s nuclear drive in exchange for sanctions relief.
“But we still believe that Israel will be safer with a one-year breakout [to a nuclear weapon] for the ten years [of restrictions stipulated by the deal], than two months,” Kerry said. The assessment that it would currently take two months for Iran to “break out” to a nuclear weapon is based on many Western intelligence estimates.
Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, opposition leader MK Isaac Herzog, Yesh Atid head MK Yair Lapid and other political leaders have slammed the deal, which leaves much of Iran’s enrichment infrastructure and offensive missile programs intact, and, they say, depends on trusting the Iranian regime to adhere to the agreement despite a long record of breaking previous promises.
Those worries are shared by many US lawmakers working to pass congressional resolutions and bills that might stymie the deal, or at least curtail America’s implementation of its part of the agreement.
“Now there’s no alternative being provided by all these other people,” Kerry charged.
“There’s a lot of fantasy out there about this – quote – ‘better deal.’ The fact is we spent four years putting together an agreement that had the consent of Russia, China, France, Germany, Great Britain and Iran. That is not easy, and I believe the agreement we got will withstand scrutiny and deliver an Iran that cannot get a nuclear weapon,” he said.
US Defense Secretary Ash Carter was scheduled to arrive in Israel late Sunday to discuss the deal and American help in countering Iranian actions in the region. He will also visit Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states sharing similar concerns over the regional repercussions of the agreement.
Kerry will follow him to the region a week later, meeting with Israeli officials as well as Persian Gulf Arab leaders in Doha.

Ted Cruz Addresses Conservative Preference for a Governor as Presidential Nominee

Legal Insurrection ^ | July 19, 2015 at 11:30am 

“Would You Rather Have a Conservative as Your Next President?”

The Family Leadership Summit in Iowa on Saturday was a veritable who’s who of 2016 GOP presidential candidates including Dr. Ben Carson, Senator Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Governor Mike Huckabee, Governor Bobby Jindal, Senator Marco Rubio, Governor Rick Perry, Senator Rick Santorum, Donald Trump, and Governor Scott Walker.
I like the one-on-one sit down interview format, and I think Frank Luntz does a great job both interacting with the audience and asking key questions. According to Luntz, the candidates were “unable to rely on a Teleprompter or note cards” and as such “the presidential hopefuls display their impromptu speaking skills.” Not only did Luntz ask questions of the candidates, but the audience did, as well.
Donald Trump’s comments about John McCain have taken center stage, but there were many great moments throughout the day. You can catch all ten full interviews of the attending presidential candidates here.

Of all the interviews, I was most taken with Ted Cruz’s (surprise, surprise).
Cruz tweeted some of the key points he makes during the interview:



Watch the full Ted Cruz interview:

One of Luntz’s first questions was about the “gotta be a governor” refrain we’ve heard from many conservatives during every presidential primary in recent memory (not that being a governor made Jimmy Carter a stellar president or that not being a governor made George Washington a poor one).
Watching Cruz during this exchange is telling. He remains calm as Luntz asks the Iowan audience how many preferred a senator, then asks how many preferred a governor—the applause is much more enthusiastic for the latter. And understandably so. Governors have executive experience dealing with state legislatures, managing executive agencies and matters of their state, and handling the stress and pressure of the executive branch. Conservative prefer governors with good reason.
Clearly ready for this argument, Cruz responded, “how many of you would like to have a conservative as your next president?”, and the crowd went wild. I have to admit that if we’re looking at a former governor Bush or current governor Christie, I’m all-in for a conservative senator (or former CEO) over either of them. And if it came down to Cruz (or Carly) running against former governor O’Malley, I can’t imagine many conservatives deciding that O’Malley’s governorship makes him a better choice for president, so there are limits on this as a litmus test for GOP presidential candidates.
But what say you?

Walker vows toughest foreign policy since Reagan

The Mason City Globe Gazette ^ | July 18, 2015 | Bret Hayworth, The Sioux City Journal 

SIOUX CITY - Pointing to his experience as Wisconsin's chief executive, Gov. Scott Walker on Saturday vowed he would establish the toughest foreign policy since Ronald Reagan if he wins the presidency in 2016.
Walker, a Republican, told a crowd of 200 in Sioux City that he would steer the nation away from Democratic President Barack Obama's failed, inadequate defense of longtime ally Israel and ensure that sanctions remain on Iran, a nation that is suspected of wanting to develop nuclear weapons.
A 60-day period for Congress to review Obama's deal to lift sanctions on Iran is underway.
"Iran is not a place we should being doing business with," Walker said.
Walker spoke for 20 minutes outside a Republican Party office downtown on a sunny day. He didn't take questions from the crowd.
He came through the city as part of a six-state, 16-city swing after launching his campaign Monday in Wisconsin. He plans to visit 10 Iowa counties through Sunday, traveling in a Winnebago motor home.
Walker noted that he lived as a young boy in Plainfield, Iowa, in the 1970s before his minister father moved the family to Wisconsin. He peppered his remarks with statements about living in Iowa, Big 10 Conference sports and shopping for bargains at Kohl's.
When he turned to policies, Walker said he would boost the economy by reducing harmful federal regulations on business, decreasing tax rates and ensuring that all types of energy be used nationally.
"I am for building a better economy, where everyone can be lifted up and get their piece of the American Dream. And I am for protecting your children and grandchildren from the threats of radical Islamic terrorism and other threats like that in the world," Walker said.
As for his Wisconsin accomplishments, Walker pointed to education reform, lowering property taxes and reducing benefits to state employee union members in 2011.
Walker said in becoming the first Republican governor in Wisconsin since 1984 he has demonstrated the mettle needed to win a bruising presidential election next year.
"I am going to come back and play to win in Iowa," Walker said of the state that is among roughly 10 battleground states that could decide the presidency.
Walker has led the broad Republican field in Iowa polls for many months, even though he wasn't officially a candidate until this week.
Sandy Sievers of Sioux City said Walker is among her current five top choices for president. She also likes former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Marco Rubio of Florida and U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Lindsay Graham, of South Carolina.
"I am checking Walker out thoroughly," Sievers said. "He is with my philosophy on foreign affairs. We do need to support Israel. We have kind of left them to sink or swim."
Jim Lewis of Sioux City has Walker and Perry in his top tier of candidates.
Lewis said the fact that Walker prevailed after an election to remove him from the governor position is impressive.
"He is coming from a blue (Democratic-leaning) state. He won the election on the recall even more than he won the first time. To me, that shows he is doing the right thing," Lewis said.

Martin O’Malley booed off stage at Netroots Nation after saying “all lives matter”!

Hotair ^ | 07/18/2015 | Jazz Shaw 


The long knives are out at Netroots Nation 2015, but for once they aren’t pointed at the Republicans. The infighting has gotten ugly because the non-Hillary Democrat candidates were apparently not focused intently enough on the #BlackLivesMatter movement. No other topics of discussion seem to be acceptable this year, and the high profile speakers got an earful if they strayed from that script or dared say something more general about the needs of the entire population of the nation. The first, and probably biggest loser of the day was Martin O’Malley, who showed up there and foolishly began talking about things like income inequality and prison reform.

The crowd wanted none of it and began chanting, “Black Lives Matter” until O’Malley was silenced and the stage was given over to a “Black Lives Matter activist” who explained that they didn’t need to hear about those other things. That’s when O’Malley attempted to respond and foolishly uttered the one phrase which will get you hounded to the ends of the Earth with that crowd. (From The Guardian)
His words were greeted by heckling.
O’Malley tried to respond, saying: “This is … let me … sure. I’ll just share with you … I’m trying to respond as best I can. No … hey. Look … I know, I know.”
Vargas said: “What just happened there? I’m so lost.”
O’Malley switched to an inclusive tack. He said: “Black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter.”
He was greeted, repeatedly, by booing.
Yes, Martin O’Malley stood in front of the Netroots Nations crowd and dared to say “all lives matter.” He compounded the error to an infinite degree by including, “white lives matter.” In retrospect, I’m rather shocked that he got out of there with all of his skin intact.
The crowd was whipped into a frenzy to the point where Bernie Sanders, up next on the agenda, was also essentially driven from the stage and he didn’t even get to say anything “controversial” along those lines.
Sanders began a prepared introduction – as had been delivered by O’Malley – talking about policies, including media bias and the need for a raised minimum wage. Chants of “black lives matter” and “save our men” then broke out again.
“Black lives of course matter,” Sanders said. “I spent 50 years of my life fighting for civil rights and dignity, but if you don’t want me to be here that’s OK. I don’t want to out-scream people.”
The speeches were being moderated (of course) by Jose Antonio Vargas, noted illegal immigrant and journalist who we’ve written about here many times. (Apparently we are still unable to deport him, even though he was arrested in Texas.) But even the famous “undocumented American in waiting” was unable to assuage the crowd’s lust for all Black Lives Matter all the time. At this point we should probably reflect on the fact that Hillary passed on going to the event is likely very happy that she did so.
Some Twitter goodness to flesh out the spectacle.



Iran Supreme Leader: Hey, thanks for the deal! Oh… and death to America!

Hotair ^ | 07/18/2015 | Jazz Shaw 


The deal is done, so everyone can stop carping and go home. Barack Obama clearly feels that he has further cemented his legacy of brilliant foreign policy maneuvers and restoring peace to the planet by having John Kerry work out an agreement with Iran regarding their nuclear weapons program … er, I mean, their peaceful nuclear power program , which could last for up to five, eight or ten years. (Or could end tomorrow if the Iranians get tired of yanking our chains.)
But on the plus side, at least our relations with the reclusive nation have improved, right? This should signal some thawing in tensions in the region and a more open stance with western powers. Just ask Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Obviously the deal couldn’t have gone through without having him on board, so it’s good to see him singing our praises. (Via Fox News)
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saturday that a historic nuclear deal reached with world powers earlier this week won’t have any effect on Iran’s policy toward the U.S.
Khamenei said in a televised speech that U.S. policy in the Middle East runs counter to Tehran’s strategy and that Iran will continue to support its allies in the Middle East including the Lebanese, Hezbollah, Palestinian resistance groups and the Syrian government.
“Our policy towards the arrogant U.S. government won’t change at all,” he said. He was addressing a large crowd in Tehran, broadcast live on state TV, to mark the end of the Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan.
No matter what Iran’s powerless spokesperson, President Hassan Rouhani, may say, it seems that nothing has changed inside the real power pool of Iran. No release of American prisoners. No alteration of support for terror groups. And most certainly, no changes in the fundamental stance toward the Great Satan. Fortunately there are some international media outlets who cover the speeches and comings and goings of Iran’s leaders and that news occasionally filters through to us. (From The Star)
In an speech at a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”, Khamenei said he wanted politicians to examine the agreement to ensure national interests were preserved, as Iran would not allow the disruption of its revolutionary principles or defensive abilities.
An arch conservative with the last word on high matters of state, Khamenei repeatedly used the phrase “whether this text is approved or not”, implying the accord has yet to win definitive backing from Iran’s factionalised political establishment…
“The Americans dub the Lebanese resistance terrorists and regard Iran as a supporter of terrorism because of its support for the Lebanese Hezbollah, while the Americans themselves are the real terrorists who have created Islamic State and support the wicked Zionists,” Khamenei said.
Nothing has changed. And as far as I can tell, nothing is going to change. Whatever it was that we got out of this deal, the Iranians seem pretty darned happy about it. And in the end, that’s all you really need to know to see that this didn’t work out well at all.

Exclusive — ‘Proven Fundraiser’ Ted Cruz Can Defeat the Clinton Machine in 2016

Breitbart's Big Government ^ | July 18, 2015 | Rep. Jim Bridenstine 

Beating Hillary Clinton requires a Republican nominee who will energize all elements of the Republican Party: fiscal conservatives, national security conservatives, values voters, and constitutional conservatives.
Nominating a milquetoast Republican who fails to gain the support of the whole party will cripple Republican enthusiasm and shrink turnout just as it has in previous elections. Since the media is going to chastise Republicans for rejecting the liberal agenda, let’s nominate a solid conservative, energize the Republican Party, and win.
At a time when judicial activism and DC’s perverse incentives are concentrating power in Washington, we need a tested candidate who has confronted the giants from the inside, rejected them, and defeated them. Selecting such a nominee is critical, because nobody comes to Washington and becomes more principled....
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

OBAMA is trying to make the Islamic holiday of Eid an official American national holiday!

Shoebat ^ | Jul 18, 2015 

Barack Hussein Obama wishes Muslims in America and around the world “Eid Mubarak!” or blessed Eid, praising efforts to recognize the end of Ramadan as an official national holiday.
The holiday is a reminder to every American of the importance of respecting those of all faiths and beliefs,” he said in a statement that also hailed New York City’s decision to add Eid to the official school calendar.
That, he said, was “an acknowledgement of the great diversity and inclusiveness that adds to the richness of our nation.” Mayor Bill de Blasio in March made New York the first major city in America to mark the end of Ramadan and the end of the pilgrimage to Mecca as a school holiday.

Heads in the Sand [Iran ripoff - Good Read]

free beacon ^ | July 17, 2015 | Matthew Continetti 

The last week has provided a sad but worthwhile opportunity to assess the global elite, the heads of state and government, the bankers and journalists and celebrities, as they worked overtime to preserve a veneer of progress and stability. From Athens to Beijing, D.C. to Vienna, the desire has been to avoid tough decisions, to prolong deliberation, to pretend as though dangerous emerging trends do not exist. To take action, to provoke, to choose, to commit, to fight, to admit reality would be far too disruptive, would cost too much, and would endanger the social positions our best and brightest have worked so mightily to attain. Better for them to wait things out.
The Iranian and U.S. governments, write David Sanger and Michael Gordon of the New York Times, see their nuclear deal differently: “Mr. Kerry described an Iranian capability that had been neutralized; the Iranians a capability that had been preserved.” But the difference of opinion is superficial. Both Secretary Kerry and the Iranians are right. If the Iranians hew to the agreement (a big and damning if) then the best case is that the nuclear infrastructure they have spent decades building will be frozen—“neutralized”—for about 10 years. After which they can resume the activities that so concerned everyone worried at the prospect of an Islamic theocracy obtaining nuclear weapons. Because their fundamental nuclear capabilities indeed have been “preserved.”
The Iran deal is a fabulous artifice, an intricately woven shawl that masks its real intent: the avoidance of military confrontation with Iran and the rise of Persian regional hegemony. “Either the issue of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation,” President Obama said at his press conference Thursday, “or it’s resolved through war. Those are the options.” He presented his diplomatic resolution as a fait accompli, as the best America could ever hope to do. If the deal favors Iran, which it unequivocally does— without so much as closing a nuclear facility this rogue regime gets cash, legitimacy, and an end to U.N. bans on sales of conventional weapons and ballistic missile technology—it is because Obama wanted desperately to pursue the diplomatic option and prove its validity.
John Kerry, the Times notes, told his fellow diplomats that his experience in Vietnam made him committed “to using diplomacy to avoid the horrors of war.” And so he has avoided war, at least for now, and at least as far as the Obama administration is concerned. The wars sown by Iran in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, however, will continue indefinitely, and probably will be expanded as the ayatollah and his Revolutionary Guards enjoy their windfall. Kerry and Obama both understand that their patchwork agreement is only temporary, that Iran could cheat, that the possibility exists of waking up one day in the near future to an underground nuclear test at an undisclosed Iranian facility, that in the out years of the agreement Iran, armed and antagonistic, may rush to nuclear breakout. Obama can’t say his deal ends the threat of a nuclear Iran because it obviously does not; what he does say is that if Iran complies (there’s that if again) then at the end of a decade we’ll be “much more knowledgeable about what their capabilities are, much more knowledgeable about what their program is, and still in a position to take whatever actions we would take today.”
The Iran deal, then, is good enough for the president because it delays until after the end of his term any reckoning with what he himself describes as an anti-Semitic revisionist troublemaking power. A similar deal with North Korea delayed the Stalinist regime’s first nuke test for over a decade, at which point the negotiators of the 1994 “Agreed Framework” were busy lobbying or in a governor’s mansion or advising Democratic presidential candidates. Who can doubt that 12 or 15 years from now, when Iran detonates its first nuke, Obama will appear on the evening Oculus Rift newscast, reminding us that this never would have happened had he and not Chelsea Clinton been in office?
The Iran deal isn’t an accomplishment. It required no sacrifice. Both sides wanted a deal: Iran to receive sanctions relief and assert its national pride, Obama to forestall having to take action, to prove diplomacy can work, to entertain the possibility of true détente with a longtime adversary. And both sides got what they wanted: Iran its money, weapons, missiles, and nuclear infrastructure intact, Obama a “legacy” item that allows him to smear Republicans and Israelis as warmongers. Obama says he’s aware of the nature of the Iranian regime, but he chooses to ignore that nature if it wins him plaudits from the international left and breathing room before an Iranian bomb. The deal is a finely wrought escape pod for Obama and Kerry: get out of town in 2017 on your high horse, your sanctimony and idealism unblemished.
Willfully optimistic about Iranian intentions, knowingly blind to Iranian malfeasance, to Iran’s murder of our soldiers, its imprisonment of our citizens, the deal is a rather stunning example of the lengths to which our elites will go in order to preserve the fiction of common interests, of the “international community,” of the power of engagement to liberalize autocracies. Media and cultural institutions will reward Obama and Kerry and Rouhani and Zarif for upholding the shibboleths that rule the world: give peace a chance, jaw jaw is better than war war, we’re all in this together, put yourself in the mullah’s shoes, Kennedy and Reagan negotiated with a superpower so why can’t we parody their example by kowtowing to a two-bit fundamentalist regime on the verge of bankruptcy whose shrinking population is addled by drugs and venereal disease. Meanwhile Iranian centrifuges will spin, Iran’s proxies are sowing chaos, its missile program is active, its adversarial posture toward Israel and America and the West is unbroken, and, as Jim Webb put it, “After a period of 10 years they are going to be able to say that they can move forward with a nuclear weapons policy with our acceptance.”
What we have in the Iran deal is another instance of the ruling caste distorting reality to suit its ideological preferences. It is also the most dangerous instance. So much elite discourse resembles the game let’s pretend that it’s become difficult to restate what is true and what is false. Let’s act as if Iran negotiates in good faith, as if Greece can remain in the Euro, as if the Chinese have their economic situation under control, as if immigration policy had nothing to do with the murder of Kate Steinle, as if the Islamic State can be destroyed without major American involvement, as if you can promote racial antagonism and animosity toward police without an increase in crime and disorder, as if Hillary Clinton excites the Democratic Party, as if the Confederate flag was responsible for an act of racial terrorism in Charleston, as if we shouldn’t apply moral standards to Planned Parenthood’s traffic in fetal tissue, as if Caitlyn Jenner, peace be upon her, is more courageous than Lauren Hill or Noah Galloway. And let’s do all of this without considering the trade offs and missed opportunities, the externalities and sunk costs, of maintaining a culture grounded in wish fulfillment and infantilization.
There is, after all, only so much self-delusion a society can take before it loses its mind.
We are rapidly approaching that limit.

‘Black lives matter,’ claim black leaders, but apparently only when the culprits are white!

Courier Life's Brooklyn Daily ^ | July 17, 2015 | Shavana Abruzzo 

Crime makes people angry and distrustful. It collapses communities and fuels divisions. It also allows agitators — such as the black-lives-matter crew — to cherry-pick depredations and ignore the bigger picture:

• Black teens are 4.5 times more likely to die from homicide than non-Hispanic whites, concluded a 2014 study at Northwestern University into death rates in delinquent youth.
Stanley Steemer
• Black Americans make up around 13 percent of the population, but committed more than half of all homicides recorded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics between 1980 and 2008.
Yet the black-lives-matter mob couldn’t care less. It is too busy skewering whites and cops to bother about America’s black crime and civil insubordination epidemic, after officers killed unarmed black men who bucked the law in a handful of instances, and a white sicko murdered black church-goers in South Carolina.
Civil rights cranks — from the president on down — have thundered from podiums and pulpits about the importance of black lives. They have near-harassed whites into feeling guilt and self-revulsion. They have formed a Black Lives Matter movement to lament “the deep, psychological wounds of slavery, racism, and structural oppression” in a nation whose democratically elected president is black.
They have also let black America’s offenders slide for their contempt of the law, honest work, education, and good citizenship that is at the heart of a civic plague preventing the healing:
• No furor at the cold-blooded July 7 slaughter of Bronx dad — and regrettable career con — Allen McQueen, 21, who was gunned down in broad daylight as he walked to the park holding his baby daughter, his gunman fleeing in giggles.
• No outrage accompanying the vicious July 4 beating caught on video in Cincinnati, where a group of black teens stomped a white tourist into oblivion, and then jeered, “Damn, n----, you just got knocked the f--- out!”
Summer Camps Brooklyn
• No wrath against the dozens of black teens wilding in a Georgia Wal-Mart last month, smashing around $2,000 in goods and booting a disabled shopper from his motorized shopping cart.
Black lives matter, but apparently only when the culprits are white for pseudo-saviors who need to address — first and foremost — the chronic black crime and delinquency rates eroding our cities and morale.