U.S., Iraq Reach 'Time Horizons' for Troop Withdrawal

Oh, and it has come out that McCain played a larger role in spurring the troop surge—which has been so successful in pacifying the situation in Iraq—than has been previously reported:

McCain turns Bush on Iraq war surge
President now praises senator's foresight

About ten years ago, I learned something: Anti-Semitism has a comfortable home on the left. I didn't work it out myself; I simply heard Dennis Prager talking about it. It sounded shocking at the time—why would a group align itself in such overwhelming percentages with an ideology so liberally peppered with people who have some ugly views about said group?

Well, the why is a subject for another time, but over the decade, my observations have confirmed Prager's points in every regard.

And in this election cycle, crypto-anti-Semitism has become a tool with which the DNC itself is hoping to scare voters:

The DNC’s anti-Semitism

I guess Barack Obama was right after all. This election will see dirty smears based on identity politics. He just got the party wrong. This didn’t come from a blogger or an e-mail kook — this comes from the DNC itself. In 660 words, they manage to use a derivative of the word Jew five times in attacking Cantor. They never explain why this forms such a strong theme in their opposition of Cantor, but apparently they believe that Democrats won’t need an explanation to oppose Jews.

Wow.

By Right Girl

Those who know me also know what I have been saying for the last few years.

As far back as 2005, I said . . .

Hillary Clinton will never make it through the primaries.

Yes, that's right, when the conservatives were terrified at the prospect of another President Clinton, I was firmly stating and believed that Hillary would never even make it through the primaries. Back around 2005, and over the course of a year or so, I had occasion to speak with a number of people close to the situation, including Dick Morris and others. I said it to all of them: Hillary Clinton is old news, boring, oh, and kinda shrill. I stuck to my story all along, when many around me were in despair.

Not saying I told ya so or anything . . . oh wait, yes I am.

Fast forward to present time, and I think there is a thought starting to brew in the back of many Democrats' brains: "Have we backed the right guy?"

Since Obama became the presumptive nominee, I have said he would lose. In May—and I have a bet for a nice dinner with my brother-in-law—I said, IF, nothing major comes out about McCain, and he does not fall ill, he will beat Obama by a 4–10 point spread. Yes, you read that right: 4 to 10.

My reasoning for this, back in May, was simple. Give the inexperienced candidate time. He will slip up. Wait for the debates. His lack of on-the-job, real WORLD experience will shine as bright as his facade. In fact, I was saying he would lose long before May.

And now, Russia has just become the left's worse nightmare. In fact, shortly you will see them screaming about Condi & Dick, how they ON PURPOSE have been trying to bring the Cold War back so Obama will lose. You just wait—the media will have to point a finger as to why their pre-ordained Chosen One lost. (See, even the media knows he is lousy on foreign policy.)

Had Hillary been the nominee to run against McCain, she would have had a treasure trove of ammo to blast from atop any hill—and for the media to repeat endlessly—about why she has the experience to handle foreign policy. (Whether it's true or not is a different matter, but she's got more than Obama at least.) In Obama's case, one highly over-publicized trip to the Middle East does not make one able to become an expert on foreign policy.

Are the Dems starting to become disillusioned with their Obamessiah? Is humpty dumpty about to have a great fall? Did they make the wrong choice? Was the man with no experience and enough baggage to overload a TSA station really a bad choice after all?

They won't admit it openly (at least yet), but probably some of them are thinking it privately.

Obama will not win. Obama was, in fact, the right choice — well, for the right, anyways :-)

Why does my prediction matter? Well, I was right about Hillary, wasn't I?

Washington:

A recent look at the state voter database revealed over 16,000 teens who were registered to vote in Washington before they were eligible. Mobilizing the youth vote is fine, but this flaw in our voter registration database has resulted in at least 127 illegal votes over the last eight years. Four underage votes were cast in the presidential primary last February.

State law allows 17-year-olds to register to vote if they will turn 18 before the next election. But while most people think of November as election season, the state also has special elections and primaries. Since 2000, over 16,000 teens have been prematurely registered.

Arizona:

Based on preliminary investigations, the American Civil Rights Coalition (ACRC) believes that a systematic, deceptive effort, led by the group By Any Means Necessary, was attempted to sabotage Civil Rights Initiative campaigns. Jennifer Gratz, ACRC’s Director of State and Local Initiatives, stated, “BAMN is a radical, thug organization that has proven time and time again that they are willing to live up to their name and use ‘any means necessary’ to stop voters from deciding if race and gender preferences policies should be legal.”

ACRC has announced a $10,000 reward to anyone who brings forward information that leads to the arrest and conviction of anyone who engaged in such efforts in the state of Arizona.

LA Times/Bloomberg has Obama up by only two (a ten point shift).

And uh oh, Reuters/Zogby has McCain up by five!

People are catching on and realizing that Obama is, at best, an empty suit.

Hmm, I wonder if that suit will have any coattails at all . . .

. . . the bully; Georgia would be the weaker kid; the U.S. would be the good, athletic kid; and Europe, the left, and the Democrats would be . . . well . . .

By Christopher Cook


A few days ago, Ukraine offered a Soviet-built facility as a base for Western missile defense.

Today, Poland and the U.S. have signed a missile defense deal.

Someone is standing up to the bully. The people who have the most to lose (the little kids whose lunch money the bully wants) and their only real defenders (conservatives in the U.S. and the West) are joining forces to oppose them.

Meanwhile, NATO is proving that it may be a spent force—owing to the fact that most of its members are the now-useless countries of Western Europe. Its tepid response to the Georgia situation does not bode well.

Similarly, the Democrats (and Obama, of course) here in the U.S. are also demonstrating the kind of gravitas you might get out of a doormat or an under-watered houseplant. They're whining that the missile system is not "adequately tested" and that it's "unproven."

That is the same sort of blather they were on about in the 80s when they scuttled missile defense then. Of course, if we had gotten on with it in the 80s, we would now have a state-of-the-art missile defense system implemented across the globe.

Their real goal, though, has nothing to do with preventing an untested system from being implemented. Their goal is the hobbling of American power. You see it in their opposition to missile defense just as much as in their opposition to the Second Amendment: the good guys should not be allowed to defend themselves, or others.

This attitude is no less perverse than its analogue in the schoolyard:

America is the good kid—smart, athletic, and noble beyond his years.

Russia is the self-loathing bully, granted inordinate strength in the genetic lottery, but without the wisdom to use it correctly.

Ukraine, Georgia, and Poland are the smaller, weaker kids—always in the wrong place at the wrong time, by virtue of their size and location.

The bully beats on the weaker kids, and the good kid's instinct is to stop him.

The left and the Democrats use a number of different methods and play a bunch of different roles, but their goal is always the same: to stop the good kid from doing anything.

Sometimes, they play the role of the schoolmarm who, foolishly seeing violence as wrong under any circumstance, sends BOTH the bully and the good kid to the principal for equal punishment (rather than rewarding the good kid for stopping the bully from harming the weak and defenseless).

Sometimes, they play the role of the other kids—not the ones at the bottom rung who are always bullied, but the ones who fear he might turn his eye towards them if they do anything to try to stop him. They implore the good kid not to challenge the bully, lest the bully's eye turn in new directions. Better to let the weak kids absorb ALL the bully's hatred.

Sometimes, they whisper in the good kid's ear, telling him that he's not as strong as he thinks he is, that he cannot defeat the bully. They slowly erode not only his self-confidence, but also his natural belief in the use of his natural strength to defend the weak and innocent. They try to convince him that he's no different from the rest of the kids, that there's nothing special about him.

And sometimes, they play the role of the kids who actually suggest that the only reason the bully is a bully at all is because he's aware of the good kid's plans to stand up to him, and he's engaging in preemptive bullying. The very existence of the bully is blamed on the good kid.

All of these beliefs, attitudes, private thoughts, and actual actions can be observed in schoolyard dynamics. Many of you have probably seen it yourselves. And its adult analogue is in evidence in the behavior of the left—sometimes craven, sometimes calculating in its never-ending goal to hobble American power.

The analogue also holds true for the numbers. There is a small but significant number of bullies. There is always the small group of weaker kids. There are the vast numbers of kids who take no stand out of fear or indifference. There are the kids (and schoolmarms) who blame the good kids and/or try to stop them.

And at any time, there are only a few good kids. They are virtually friendless, surrounded by enemies, detractors, and the perpetually indifferent.

Feeling lonely yet?

If you're an American or a Westerner who believes in defending the weak, through force if necessary, you should.

No, not our individual parents. Our national parents: Britain.

First, they are very likely to surrender (at least a portion of) their sovereignty to become a part of the European Union. In fact, according to Brits at Their Best, the Queen will be violating her coronation oath when she signs the Treaty of Lisbon:

At the time Your Majesty swore the Oath we British were sovereign and made our own laws. Our traditional custom is to freely govern ourselves. With Royal Assent to the Lisbon Treaty Act and Your Majesty's subsequently signing the ratification document, Britain becomes a mere province of the European Union. Your Majesty's subjects will be governed by Brussels, and not by Your Majesty's government.

It is Your Majesty's right, nay, it is Your Majesty's duty and obligation, to refuse Royal Assent to Acts of Parliament that threaten the People's laws and customs or Your Majesty's constitutional position.

Thus it appears to me that Your Majesty has violated the Coronation Oath.

The EU is a large, unwieldy system that takes away sovereignty and replaces it with inefficiency, blanket rules that have no local pertinence, and the looming potential for tyranny. May it be stopped.

Britain's children are also in peril (this time, I mean children literally, not metaphorically):

Childhood’s End
Britain, land of bleak houses and low expectations

Britain is the worst country in the Western world in which to be a child, according to a recent UNICEF report. Ordinarily, I would not set much store by such a report; but in this case, I think it must be right—not because I know so much about childhood in all the other 20 countries examined but because the childhood that many British parents give to their offspring is so awful that it is hard to conceive of worse, at least on a mass scale. The two poles of contemporary British child rearing are neglect and overindulgence.

Consider one British parent, Fiona MacKeown, who in November 2007 went on a six-month vacation to Goa, India, with her boyfriend and eight of her nine children by five different fathers, none of whom ever . . . continue

Britain has the third-highest rate of teenage pregnancy in the industrialized world, according to the UNICEF report (only the United States and New Zealand are higher)

 

The nations of the Anglosphere are still the greatest nations in the world—indeed, in the history of the world.

But for how much longer?

By William Owens

If Black Americans honestly believe Barack Obama truly has the best interests of their families in mind, then Black Americans had better pay attention to Obama on paper and not merely on skin.

Barack Obama has consistently shown his opposition to several key factors that protect the Black American family:

On Gay Marriage:

By a large margin, Black Americans widely oppose same-sex marriage. 67% of Black Americans favor a constitutional amendment that would define marriage between that of a man and a woman. A national survey by the Pew Research Center in May shows only 26 percent of Blacks favor gay marriage. According to a report by the National Black Justice Coalition and Freedom to Marry, approximately 75 percent of Black Americans believe homosexual relations are always wrong; and over one-third of Black Americans believe AIDS may be a punishment for homosexual behavior.

Obama’s position on gay marriage does not reflect the will of the Black American family.

Obama has suggested the gay rights issue is similar to the Civil Rights Movement and opposes all state Marriage Amendments calling them “divisive and discriminatory”. If elected President, Obama intends to fully repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Obama has further chastised Black clergy, calling leaders “homophobic” for holding to the traditional view of scripture that homosexuality is immoral, complaining “The African-American Community is more churched as most African-American churches are still fairly traditional in their interpretations of Scripture. And so from the pulpit or in sermons you still hear homophobic attitudes expressed.”


On Abortion:

According to the CDC, 1,450 Black children are aborted each day in the United States. Since Roe v. Wade, more than 14 million Black babies have been killed in the Black woman’s womb. More than twice as many Blacks have died from abortion than from heart disease, cancer, accidents, violent crimes and AIDS combined. Black American babies account for 40 percent of all abortions in America.

How does Obama’s position on abortion reflect the plight of Black American babies?

Obama, who received a 100 percent rating from NARAL in 2005, 2006 and 2007,
criticized the U.S. Supreme Court ruling for upholding the ban on partial-birth abortion. While serving in the Illinois State Senate, Obama was the ONLY state Senator to speak on the floor against the Born Alive Infant Act. The legislation was proposed in 2001 in response to nurses’ depositions saying that babies born accidentally during abortions were allowed to die of neglect in utility closets. The United States Senate, before Obama was a member, passed legislation with identical language 98 to 0.


On Educating Our Youth:

Approximately 89 percent of Black Americans would send their children to private school if they received vouchers. The Obamas, who send their children to private school, realize the benefits a private school education provides over a failing education system. Studies across the country have shown the positive effects vouchers have had on the education of our children, particularly among Black American children.

In a study on private school voucher programs in Milwaukee, Cleveland, New York and Washington, Paul Peterson of Harvard’s Kennedy School found:

“According to the test score results, African American students from low-income families who switch from a public school to a private school do considerably better after two years than students who do not receive a voucher opportunity. However, students from other ethnic backgrounds seem to learn after two years as much but no more in private schools than their public counterparts.”

In a speech to the American Federation of Teachers, Barack Obama emphatically told the teachers union that he does not support private school vouchers, saying “We need to focus on fixing and improving our public schools, not throwing our hands up and walking away from them.”


Obama has an unwavering commitment to policies that will further lend to the destruction of Black American families. His agenda is one that history has confirmed time and again as being hostile toward the Black American family and detrimental to our advancement. If we are foolish enough to believe that a person, simply because he shares our skin tone, will also share our values, we are shirking our responsibilities as Black American citizens. Not only will our families suffer, but our nation will as well.

. . . I'm sorry, remind me again, because I forgot—which people are for "peace"?

Watch this video. It is 8:00 minutes, but it is eight minutes of non-stop education. What's the lesson? That people on the hard left are really sick.

Why does that matter? Why should we care about some loons on the fringe?

Because it's not the fringe.

Yes, the people who actually march and spit and openly say they want to hang people are not a majority, but there are a lot of them. The wackos on the right are much fewer in number. (Moreover, I am not sure that designating them as being on the right (i.e., closer to classical liberalism) is even fair, but that's a discussion for another time.

Not only are there a lot more of them, but the distance between their ideological position and that of many of their fellows in power is not as great as one might think. Case in point: Barack Obama's close ties to leftist terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

Find me an equivalent of that among Republicans. I double dog dare ya.

Just a quick reminder to all SoCal residents to check out Evan Sayet's Right to Laugh night of comedy, taking place at the world famous Laugh Factory this coming Tuesday, August 19. More details ...

More details on the show here.

More info on Evan's Right to Laugh and beyond here.

More info on Evan the political pundit here.