Yes, It's time to present 2015's last statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!
Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week's nominees were particularly slimy and despicable, but the votes are in and we have our winner...the envelope please...
The Washington Post's Disgusting Cartoonist, Ann Telnaes:
I have nothing more to say about this disgraceful, vicious human being I didn't say above in the link. She is simply a vile human being without decency who richly deserves a Weasel.
Rep Ipso Loquiter...the thing speaks for itself. Happy New Year Everyone.
Check back next Tuesday to see who next week's nominees for Weasel of the Week are! Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum, and remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning. It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?
Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.
You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.
To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning.
Simple, no?
It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?
Bassist, singer and catalyst Lemmy Kilmister has made the Passage, at age 70 from cancer. Considering the other stuff he survived, well...
Lemmy stated out as the bass player for the old British trance/sci fi rock band Hawkwind, and after leaving or being fired depending on whom you talk to, went on to form one of the original proto-metal bands, Motörhead in 1975. They stuck around for twenty two albums and remained a favorite on the touring circuit. Playing was pretty much his life, and I can't help but think that's how he wanted to go out. Here he is earlier this year at Rock am Ring, playing 'Overkill.'
So long and rest in peace, Lemmy. You were definitely one of a kind.
It's time once again for the Watcher's Council's 'Weasel Of The Week' nominations, where we pick our choices to compete for the award of the famed Golden Weasel to a public figure who particularly deserves to be slimed and mocked for his or her dastardly deeds during the week. Every Tuesday morning, tune in for the Weasel of the Week nominations!
Here are this weeks' nominees....
Dim-O-Crat NY Assemblyman Chuck Lavine!
The Noisy Room : My nomination this week is Assemblyman Charles Lavine. How very stupid this is. Trump donated a 440-acre park in New York 10 years ago when a golf course deal fell through. It’s worth $100 million and has Donald Trump’s name on it. Now, liberals are demanding that Trump’s name be removed from the state park that he donated. Morons. Two weenie liberal Democrat lawmakers have now introduced the “Anything But Trump Act.” You’ve got to be freaking kidding me. They claim his name should be stripped because of his anti-Muslim stance. Assemblyman Charles Lavine – who sponsored the “Anything But Trump Act,” has some ideas who they should rename the park after. Lavine, of Long Island, suggests the state rename the park for Peter Salem, a Muslim Revolutionary War soldier from Massachusetts who fought in battles in New York state. Other suggestions include folk singer and activist Pete Seeger. Seeger, of course, was a communist. I mean, literally… he’s connected to the Communist Party USA. There is also absolutely no proof that Peter Salem was a Muslim. What a bunch of unapologetic Marxist trolls.
Lavine and Squadron weren't finished: “The rhetoric and discriminatory proposals we’ve seen from Mr. Trump don’t belong in the presidential election, and don’t belong in New York state parks,” said Squadron, of Brooklyn. “He has dishonored the state, and should not be honored with a state park named for him.” Donald Trump bluntly put it just right: “If they want, they can give me the land back.” If the liberals hate Donald Trump this deeply, then he should make a fantastic president. I still prefer Ted Cruz, but I’ll gladly vote for Trump. The Donald is driving them out of their minds with fear and loathing. I hope they give the park back to Trump. It closed four years ago due to budget cuts and Trump would surely make it a success again. For being a moronic weasel, Charles Lavine has earned the golden weasel.
Long Time Clintonista And Corrupt Political 'Fixer' Governor Terry McAuliffe!
Virginia Right! : I would like to nominate Terry McAuliffe for the Weasel of the Week. There are many, many reasons he should win, but the anti-gun leftist has gone over the line. He and his activist Attorney General Mark "The Red" Herring decided arbitrarily to cancel the reciprocating Concealed Weapons Permit agreements Virginia had with 25 state after a "review" of the other state's gun laws.
The general assembly has been working for years along with Democratic Governors in many instances, to bring Virginia and other states into uniformity so that Virginian's who hold CCP's here can also carry legally in other states.
Many of these states have laws allowing reciprocating agreements agreements with states that honor their permits. And some automatically terminate or refuse to honor CCP's in states that do not allow their citizens the legal ability to conceal. Out of the 25 states that McAuliffe cancelled, 7 or 8 will be terminated by law. The rest are up in the air.
The uselessness of this gun rights infringement is highlighted by a FOIA request to the Virginia State Police for information on crimes involving guns committed under a reciprocating agreement. The FOIA produces no results. No crimes.
And the fact that the CCP holders from another statr are free to come in to Virginia and OPEN CARRY shows just how absurd this is. As long as you have a legal weapon, you do not need any permit or even any training to strap on a holster and walk around most of the state. Of course, the same governor has outlawed guns in State buildings owned or leased by the Executive Branch. Adding to the confusion.
And the state owned liquor stores are now gun free zones ripe for robbery by criminals who don't obey the law anyway.
So if you come to Virginia, you are welcome to strap on a side arm and go most any place not owned by Terry McAuliffe and his henchmen. Oh, and stay out of Starbucks and Buffalo Wild Wings too. They are safe zones for criminals as well.
Fausta's Blog : The Bal Harbour Village police, who funneled millions in drug money into the bank accounts of Venezuelans, but never investigated the people to whom they were sending millions in drug proceeds, including a host of individuals with criminal records.
Tucked away behind a large mosque on a side street in Yogyakarta, Al Fatah Pesantren is, according to its leader, the only Muslim academy or madrasa for transgender people in the world. Shinta Ratri, the school’s 53-year-old director, founded it with other transgender women in 2008, two years after a major earthquake convulsed the city. “It was a time of suffering, and transgender people needed a way to pray,” she said. “We needed a place to worship together and learn about Islam.”
The mind-numbingly long piece fails at its mission. The Grey Lady's absurd obsession over an infinitesimally small minority group only evokes scorn, ridicule and derision.
The Washington Post's Disgusting Cartoonist, Ann Telnaes
Well, there it is. What a despicable group of Weasels...ANY OF THEM COULD WIN! Check back Thursday to see which Weasel walks off with the statuette of shame!
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum.
And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning. It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?
This is the story of a 'teachable moment' that wasn't intended to be one.
Shachar Rabinovitch is a 13-year-old girl living in Israel. She recently wrote to British academic Marsha Levine, who is reportedly an expert on horses that she was doing a school project and sent her a polite letter asking her for some information about the domestication and breeding of early horse species:
Hello!
My name is Shachar Rabinovitch and I'm from Israel.
I'm doing an assessment for school about horses, and it will be great if you can answer a few questions that I will ask.
1. What ancient horses breeds preserved and were a base to the breeds we know today?
2. How did the ancient humans created new breeds or kept the ones who already were existent?
3. What ancient horse breed the ancient humans used the most and what were those uses?
4. Where did the ancient horses breeds lived?
Thank you for reading my questions,
Shachar Rabinovitch
Levine, who is Jewish (at least genetically) and who still claims to be a researcher at Cambridge University although apparently she no longer is, replied :
Dear Shachar Rabinovich:
I'll answer your questions when there is peace and justice for Palestinians in Palestine.
I am a member of Jews for Justice for Palestinians. I support Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions. You might be a child, but if you are old enough to write to me, you are old enough to learn about Israeli history and how it has impacted on the lives of Palestinian people. Maybe your family has the same views as I do, but I doubt it. So, I suggest that you look at this link: (link to this hate site omitted by yours truly)
yours sincerely
Dr. Marsha Levine
Levine caught a little bit of flack even in the UK for this gratuitous nastiness. She defended herself for her response as “fair,” saying she didn’t want to boost the 13-year-old girl’s “ego or make her feel better about herself.” Per Britain's Jewish Chronicle:
“I made the decision that I have the choice not to waste my time on people who tread on the rights of other people. I didn’t do anything to her. I said that when there is justice for Palestine I will answer her – that’s a fair answer.
“I want this girl not to worry about horses. I don’t need people emailing me… I don’t see any obligation to further her ego or make her feel better about herself.”
In other words, she decided to boost her own ego by shaming a 13-year-old girl who did nothing to her but ask a few polite questions about a subject Dr. Levine is supposedly a known expert on. And of course, to let her know that as a Jew living in a country Dr. Levine considers a pariah, she wasn't entitled to even basic civility, let alone any education.
A number of people have commented on the cruelty of Marsha Levine's response to a 13-year old girl, but I actually see Marsha Levine's action in a positive light. While her intent wasn't to teach Shachar anything, I think she did, and she even might have imparted something to more than a few discerning Jews victimized by what I refer to as the Jewish Stockholm Syndrome.
You see, Ms. Levine has now given young Shachar some important lessons - that Jew hatred and its modern mask 'anti-Zionism' is a psychosis which no appeasement, actions or 'dialogue' can alleviate or end, and that all too many Jews eagerly participate in it with extraordinary zeal. She also now understands that there is no consideration or quarter given for age or sex and most importantly, that a strong and powerful Israel is an absolute necessity.
She has also learned exactly what kind of 'human beings' populate BDS ranks.
These are valuable lessons a lot of Jews, especially in the diaspora have yet to learn. So Marsha Levine was actually teaching in spite of herself...just not what she expected to teach.
Speaking of which, various other academics who are experts on horses were revolted by Marsha Levine, and are helping Shachar with the information she was seeking. As one of them, Professor James Russell of Harvard put it,“Prof. Levine’s conduct is unprofessional and beneath human contempt. It makes one ashamed to be a member of the same academic profession. But it does reflect very accurately the character of the BDS movement and of those who support it.”
Indeed it does. Unintended education can sometimes be the most valuable of all.
I had to laugh at this one. Jeb Bush's campaign is in such dire condition that he's been reduced to issuing schoolyard challenges to GOP front runner Donald Trump!
Please pack it in Governor Bush, and at least salvage some dignity. It would be, ummm, an act of love wouldn't it?
The latestheadlines about the key battle between ISIS and the Iraqi Army are talking about the 'liberation' of the ISIS held city of Ramadi...including the map above, which I include for reference purposes. The truth is something rather different.
It only took 600 ISIS fighters to capture Ramadi from a much larger army of fully armed and equipped Iraqi troops when the predominately Sunni city fell to ISIS last May. The current battle underlines how disparate the two forces are. Ramadi has been held for months against the attacks of large forces of US equipped Iraqi troops by a fairly small number of ISIS fighters. The way the current battle for the city is shaping up tells us quite a bit.
There are an estimated 300 ISIS fighters who are in Ramadi pitted against 10,000 Iraqi troops and Iran-armed militia forces aided by US air cover. So far, the best the Iraqis have been able to do is to 'liberate' about half of the city. The well publicized flag raising occurred in the city's government compound, and while that plus a few major neighborhoods are now liberated, even the Iraqi military is quietly admitting that about half the city, much of which is now a heavily damaged ghost town is still under ISIS control. Even more telling, Brigadier General Ahmed al-Belawi, one of the chief Iraqi commanders admitted that the ISIS troops whom were dug in at the government compound pulled out in good order and escaped rather than being killed or captured.
Since there's nothing much left to plunder in Ramadi and a lot of the population left when the US led airstrikes began, this suggests to me that what ISIS had planned here is a delaying action, with a small number of troops ordered to hold off the Iraqi forces and inflict the maximum amount of Iraqi casualties as they retreat in force. If that's what ISIS has planned, they seem to have succeeded so far.
That doesn't mean that this isn't a setback for ISIS, merely that it's not quite the dramatic victory it's being painted as. One could argue that Russia's Vladimir Putin is doing far more damage to ISIS by targeting its oil shipments and refineries, where a fair amount of ISIS's wealth derives from.
What the battle really underlines is how poorly the Shi'ite army the American taxpayer spent billions of dollars to train and equip performs, even when they outnumber the enemy by better than ten to one and are much better armed and equipped.How the Iraqi army will perform when the fighting moves up to Ninevah and Mosul is anyone's guess.
Another point worth mentioning is that the Shi'ite dictatorship we put into place in Iraq has little or no respect or gratitude for American efforts on their behalf. The Shi'ite Iraqi government made a point of not mentioning the key role US airstrikes played in whatever progress they have been able to make against ISIS. The Iraqis would not have taken Ramadi without our air power.
This attitude is something I saw coming a long time ago. Americans should perhaps keep this in mind the next time anyone starts blathering about 'nation building' or 'Arab democracy.'
On December 20th, Lakeisha Holloway drove a car onto a crowded sidewalk on the Las Vegas Strip in front of the Paris Hotel & Casino, and Planet Hollywood. She killed a mother of three while injuring many others, some critically.
The Vegas police had no difficulty in saying that the attack was deliberate and charging her with a number of felony offenses, including the murder of Jessica Valenzuela, 32, of Buckeye, Arizona, who was visiting Vegas with her husband,child abuse or neglect (her three year old was in the back seat) and failure to stop at the scene of an accident.
Her tires were flattened in the assault and she was apprehended by the police not to far from the crime scene.
This so closely resembled the attacks using cars going on in Jerusalem that my first thought immediately was that this was a jihadi strike, probably by someone indoctrinated at a radical mosque.
But what really had the alarm bells ringing for me was when the police described her demeanor as 'stoic' and said she had given them a reason for the assault. But Las Vegas Sheriff Joe Lomabardo refused to disclose to the media what that reason was when asked about a motive, saying "She did (offer and explanation for the attacks) and I’m not comfortable disclosing that at this point because it is an ongoing investigation. I can’t go any further into that comment."
After what happened in San Bernardino, the only rational explanation for his reluctance to disclose what the killer had told him was if Islam was involved and he got a call from upstairs somewhere to keep his mouth shut about it. The police did the exact same thing in San Bernardino, refusing to reveal the killer's names until bloggers and reporters heard them mentioned on the police scanner and outed them.
The same thing just happened. Various eyewitnesses are saying now that the car windows were open and Lakeisha Holloway was screaming 'Allahu Akbar!' as she mowed down pedestrians:
The witness went on to say "As this unfolded, the only thing I recall as this happened is the insane sound of her car accelerating and the voice from the car was screaming "Allah Akbar!" I've heard the sound enough times on the news that I was waiting for a bomb to blow up or guns to start firing. "
I have a feeling that after Christmas as more and more on this comes out the authorities are going to have to admit what happened. I have a distinct feeling that my first gut feeling, that this was a jihad attack is going to be proven correct. I hope I'm wrong.
As I predicted, the EU's new diktat 'yellow starring' goods made or grown in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and the Golan has suffered serious backlash.
Today, the Czech Republic joined Hungary, Germany and Greece in formally voicing criticism of the EU's diktat. Since the labeling procedure, size and format is not specified, there's little doubt in my mind that it will either be ignored or at best marginally complied with in these countries. The same is true of countries like non EU members Switzerland, Bulgaria,Albania (the last two have reasonably close ties to Israel)and the other Balkan states. EU countries like Poland, Romania, and Cyprus are unlikely to go along with it either for the same reason.
What all these countries have in common with the exception of Germany (and of course, Bulgaria and Albania) are small or non-existent Muslim populations they have no need to appease. Germany of course has historical reasons for feeling particularly uneasy about something like this, while warm relations between Bulgaria, Albania and the Jews are longstanding.
While EU foreign policy czar Federica Mogherini might claim that this move by the EU is merely "technical guidelines on the indication of origin, which is in no way a boycott," most Europeans know better, and so does Ms. Mogherini.
There are literally over a hundred territorial disputes in the world, some involving countries like India and China, some even involving EU members. But Israel and Israel alone is being singled out for this treatment. And the real meaning is quite clear. This is the EU picking sides in this struggle between Israel and the Arabs whom call themselves 'Palestinians' and they've chosen to side with the Arabs. These 'guidelines' are essentially the opening shots in an attempt by the EU to make economic war on Israel and to force Israel back to indefensible borders.
It will fail for a number of reasons.
Israel imports far more from the EU than it exports, and only a small percentage of the $14 billion trade between Israel and the EU is impacted by these new guidelines. A counter boycott of EU goods by Israel and its supporters worldwide would affect the EU a lot more than it would hurt Israel since almost nothing Israel imports from the EU is anything it can't produce domestically or obtain elsewhere.
For that matter, the EU has been threatening this for quite some time, and most Israeli producers whom grow any
items with a shelf life in the areas mentioned cut back on imports to
the EU along time ago. They're exporting to Russia, India, East Asia,
Australia, Canada, the US, non-EU Europe, the Caucasus and yes, even the Arab
world after repackaging. Expect that strategy to be mirrored in Europe, where a lot of countries will simply wink and ignore the labeling diktat.
The EU choosing to side with their murderous welfare recipients in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas's little reichlet instead of a vibrant western democracy like Israel makes little sense considering the problems the EU already had to deal with.
There has been a great deal of speculation about Turkey restoring ties with Israel, based on leaked details of initial meetings between representatives of the two nations that were held at Islamist Turkish leader Tayyip Erdoğan's request.
For those of you who need a quick recap, Israel and Turkey had very close ties until Erdoğan and his Islamist AKP Party took over in 2002, after which they deteriorated rapidly. The end came in 2010 when the Turkish government sponsored a 'humanitarian aid' fleet designed to break the Israeli blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza. When the Israeli navy intercepted the ships and instructed them to proceed to an Israeli port so their cargoes could be examined, they all complied without incident except one, the Mavi Marmara.
That ship was loaded with IHH terrorists who were deliberately seeking a confrontation. After refusing repeated orders to put into port, the ship was boarded only to find that the crew of the Mavi Mamara had planned an ambush and attacked the unarmed sailors with knives, iron bars, clubs and firearms.
The Israelis sent Naval commandos to board the ship to rescue the injured sailors and take over the ship. This time the results were different, with 9 of the crew of the Mavi Mamara ending up getting themselves killed when they attacked the commandos. Out of the entire flotilla of ship attempting to run the blockade, only two were found to have small amounts of what could be called 'humanitarian aid. Most of them, like the Mavi Mamara carried nothing and were simply seeking to run the blockade.
In spite of Israel's attempt to placate Turkey and resolve the matter, Erdoğan used this as an excuse to break relations completely. Even an apology to Erdoğan that US President Barack Obama arm twisted out of Israeli PM Netanyahu didn't change anything, and Erdoğan subsequently proved on many occasions that he dislikes Jews and Israel almost as much as he hates Kurds.
So what's behind the sudden attempts to kiss and make up?
Turkey's shooting down of a Russian fighter on November 24th that was in Turkey's air space for something like 17 seconds was a major overreach. Vladimir Putin made it quite clear that he regarded the attack as unprovoked aggression and that there would be significant consequences. So Erdoğan has now come scurrying back to his former friends - NATO, and Israel. Ankara is also concerned about Iran's growing power and feels it shares a common enemy with Israel there.
The original negotiations, carried out in Switzerland went something like this. Israel tentatively agreed to set up a compensation fund - unconfirmed reports put it at around $20 million (I personally doubt it was anything like that much) for the families of the 9 killed on the Mavi Mamara. Turkey would bar Hamas from Turkey, and the two countries would also exchange ambassadors.
Even more important, Turkey and Israel would collaborate on a gas pipeline to supply gas to Turkey and Europe from Israel's massive Mediterranean gas strikes.
While Israel's Hebrew press went wild over this, reality has now reared its ugly head.
Instead of distancing itself from Turkey's friends Hamas, the first thing Erdoğan and Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu did was to invite Hamas politburo chief Khalid Mesha'al to Ankara for a nice cozy chat over the weekend. And then Davutoğlu gave a press conference which spelled out clearly that whatever occurred in Switzerland, the AKP's attitude towards Israel hadn't changed one bit.
“No one is more sensitive on Gaza, Palestine, than us. Our sole goal is to bring solutions to the problems of our Palestinian brothers. This is the main objective behind our talks for the normalization of our relationship with Israel. We will not take any steps that would sadden Palestine and Gaza but we won’t hesitate to take every step that would be to their benefits, no matter what they say,” Davutoğlu told his parliamentary group on Dec 22. He also exchanged views with Hamas official Khaled Meshal about Turkey’s process with Israel in a meeting over the weekend. {...}
“Turkey has become the first state to ever enjoy the honor of making Israel formally apologize over such an incident. We have not given concessions to anybody while defending our rights,” Davutoğlu said, adding that no final agreement had been reached but talks were continuing positively with Israel.
in classic Middle East bargaining style, the Turks, you see,now want something else to finalize the deal. They want Israel to break the blockade of Gaza and allow Turkey to have what some sources referred to as 'a foothold in Gaza', and to be the intermediary between Israel and Hamas.
As Netanyahu made clear, that isn't going to happen, especially since Turkey has made no move to oust Hamas, who now have their headquarters in Istanbul. The only tangible sign of that was the expulsion of Saleh al-Arouri, a senior figure in Hamas’ military arm who operated terrorist cells in Judea and Samaria from there. There's no indication that this is anything but a temporary measure, since he could return any time. In fact, at least one of my sources tells me there's a decent amount of evidence that this particular move was even arranged in advance with Mesha'al and al-Arouri. The Hamas headquarters haven't been closed down and there are still plenty of Hamas figures still in Turkey.
Even without getting rid of the Gaza Blockade, the deal is a good one for Turkey but not nearly so good for Israel. The AKP and Erdoğan are not to be trusted one iota when it comes to Israel because they will always return to their Islamist love affair with the likes of Hamas, and their innate hatred of Israel. It's in their DNA. And siding with them against Russia and Putin is a bad idea, not to mention the Israel-friendly Kurds. Additionally, the idea of a pipeline running through Turkish territory could leave Israel open to blackmail and even sabotage in the event Erdoğan decides to turn the screws. There are other customers for Israel's gas and other ways of getting it to them.
The Iran factor shouldn't be counted on too much either. Turkey was notorious for violating the sanctions on Iran, and given Turkey's poor economy, there's no guaranty they could be trusted there either. As a matter of fact, Turkey hasn't exactly been much of an ally to NATO since the AKP took over, and there's no reason Israel should expect anything better from Erdoğan's Turkey at this point.
Far better to just agree to limit this to the exchange of ambassadors and see if Erdoğan is actually serious or if he simply wants to get whatever he can out of Israel before torpedoing relations like he did the last time.
The Left is on a jihad to teach us differently, but Senator Ted Cruz, like most politicians, understands that most Americans approve of traditional family values and like to see them reflected in the people they elect to office. This is common sense on their part - a man or woman with a family to protect and care for has a stake in society and his or her decisions are going to reflect that.
If the family is photogenic, that's also a plus. And as anyone who's ever run for office will tell you, running for office is a time consuming, demanding enterprise. And having the spouse and kids along when possible gives the family a little more time to spend together.
So Ted Cruz decided to have some fun with his family doing a commercial with a Christmas theme. It's political of course, but in a lighthearted and witty way modeled on the old Saturday Night Live faux commercials. Anyone with a sense of humor should be able to appreciate it, even if you disagree with Senator Cruz's positions:
That when Washington Post editorial cartoonist Ann Telnaes decided to attack Cruz's five and seven year old daughters, depicting them in a racist cartoon as mindless dancing monkeys, with Senator Ted Cruz as the organ grinder. You can see this on twitter in a gif she created here. (this gutless creep subsequently has removed that as well)
Her excuse for this viciousness was that if they were 'props' in the ad, they were 'fair game.'
Oh really? I wonder what the reaction would be if a major outlet like the Washington Post used that logic to depict the kids in this political ad as monkeys? Malia and Sasha appear about twenty minutes in:
Or how about the quaint little family group pictured in this political ad below?
After a major outcry, Washington Post editor Fred Hiatt removed the cartoon and Ann Telnaes' lame explanation with this comment :
Editor’s note from Fred Hiatt: It’s generally been the policy of our editorial section to leave children out of it. I failed to look at this cartoon before it was published. I understand why Ann thought an exception to the policy was warranted in this case, but I do not agree.
He 'failed to look at it?' He's supposedly the editor and he just let this go through without even taking the ten seconds it would take to glance at it and see this for what it was? I'd certainly like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but given the Washington Post's default ideological position, it's not easy. Especially since the Left has always crossed that line, with some honorable exceptions. Just ask the Palin kids or the Bush twins.
And there's also the fact that this is blatant racism, since Cruz and his children have Cuban ancestry. Would a cartoon of Obama's daughters as monkeys have ever gotten by the WAPO's editors? And if it had, can you imagine the headlines, and perhaps even the racial violence in response? Hiatt and Telnaes would be fortunate merely to be fired and allowed to leave town in one piece. Needless to say, since its Ted Cruz and he has an 'R' after his name, they'll merely remove the cartoon, issue a lame response that isn't even decent enough to be an apology and perhaps just chuckle among themselves about it in private.
Ted Cruz was his usual classy self in response, of course :
Actually.. they are indeed out of her league, not that it's a very high bar. Their father and mother have obviously raised them with a sense of decency, of right and wrong. Ms. Telnaes obviously never had the benefit of that sort of thing.
Unfortunately, she's just the first one out of the box. Rest assured that if Ted Cruz's star continues to rise, you're going to see a lot more of this.
The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.
"There are times when fear is good. It must keep its watchful place at the heart's controls." - Aeschylus
“Guns are our friends because in a country without guns, I'm what's known as "prey." All females are.” - Ann Coulter
"We've got some people who think Shariah law oughta be the law of the land, forget the Constitution. But the guns are there, the Second Amendment is there, to make sure all of the rest of the amendments are followed." - Rep. Louis Golmert (R-TX)
"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" - Qu'ran 8:12
This week's winning essay, The Right Planet'sObama Attempts to Limit Citizens’ Ability to Defend Themselves Against Terrorism is an excellent, in depth account of of the worst part of the San Bernardina jihadist strike. It shows that not only is the Obama Administration letting unvetted migrants into the country, it's using San Bernardino to do its utmost to disarm American citizens. Here's a slice:
More and more details are leaking out regarding the recent atrocity in San Bernardino, California. According to CNN, Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, traveled to Saudi Arabia for nine days, possibly for the Hajj. Officials told CNN he traveled again to Saudi Arabia in 2015, where he most likely met his wife, Tasheen Malik. Farook’s family claim the couple met on a dating website. It appears Syed Farook went to Saudi Arabia to meet her. Tasheen Malik traveled to the U.S. on a “fiancée visa” (K-1 visa). After her arrival in the States she was granted legal permanent residence (i.e. granted “green card”). They were married for two years. Tasheen Malik, 27, was the mother of six-month-old child. The couple left the child with the grandmother on the morning of the atrocity, saying they had to go to a doctor’s appointment.
Syed Rizwan Farook — one-half of the couple behind the San Bernardino shooting massacre — was apparently radicalized and in touch with people being investigated by the FBI for international terrorism, law enforcement officials said Thursday.
Farook’s apparent radicalization contributed to his role in the mass shooting, with his wife Tashfeen Malik, of 14 people on Wednesday during a holiday party for the San Bernardino County health department, where Farook worked, sources said.
Still, it wasn’t necessarily the only driver behind the carnage as workplace grievances may have also played a role. President Barack Obama hinted as much Thursday when he said that the attackers may have had “mixed motives.”
Farook traveled to Saudi Arabia for several weeks in 2013 on the Hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca that Muslims are required to take at least once in their lifetime, which didn’t raise red flags, said two government officials. It was during this trip that he met Malik, a native of Pakistan who came to the United States on a “fiancée visa” and later became a lawful permanent resident.
Syed Farook was born in Chicago, the son of Pakistani immigrants. The family later moved to Riverside, California, according to the Los Angeles Times.
CBS News reported, “Tashfeen Malik passed DHS counterterrorism screening as part of her vetting for K-1 visa.” As a result, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) are demanding the Obama White House hand over the immigration records of the jihadi couple responsible for the slaughter in San Bernardino.
Farook reportedly had contact with known terrorists in the Middle East. He has also traveled to the Middle East and to Pakistan multiple times. It has also been reported that Farook viewed ISIS propaganda online. Investigators found a heavy arsenal of guns, ammunition and pipe bombs at their house in Redlands, Cal.
Apparently, Farook spent more of his free time at the mosque memorizing the Qu’ran.
At around 11 A.M. Wednesday, the killer couple entered the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino and opened fire, murdering 14 people and wounding 21 others. One San Bernardino police officer described the murder scene as “unspeakable carnage.”
Following an afternoon car chase, the butchers were killed in a firefight with police. Both “suspects were heavily armed and wearing tactical attire, and they had an arsenal of ammunition and pipe bombs in their Redlands home,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
So what has been the response from the Obama Administration and the rabid Left in the wake of the carnage in San Bernardino? “
Well, it goes something like this. “Save your stupid, worthless thoughts and prayers” and “act now on gun control.”
Oh, but the despicable Daily News, et al., didn’t stop there. They decided to double-down on their misplaced hate and vile rhetoric by attempting to blame the NRA (yeah, imagine that) for the mass-murder—namely, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.
This article does an exceptional job of spelling out the differences not just between the foreign policy stances of Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, but gives a between the lines explanation of exactly what's been wrong with American foreign policy in the last 40 years. Do read it.
Here are this week’s full results. Only GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD was unable to vote this week, but was not affected by the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:
Fifth place with 1/3 vote -Adam Elkus/War on the Rocks – The Fifty Shades of Gray War submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
See you next week!
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!
And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning. It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?
Judge Carolyn Walker-Diallo, who was elected as a judge in Brooklyn's 7th Municipal District was sworn in today. She insisted on swearing her oath of office on the Qu'ran.
She's certainly not the first Muslim office holder in America to do so. Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) did it in 2006. She's not even the first Muslim judge. In 2013, Sheila Abdus-Salaam became the first black woman and first Muslim ever to sit on the Court of Appeals, New York's highest judicial body.
And Ms. Walker-Diallo is obviously a very devout Muslim.
So why is this problematic?
Swearing on the Qu'ran, the Bible or any religious text isn't a requirement to serve. The applicable law says only that someone elected to office must “swear or affirm” an oath, and it need not have any religious connotation at all. So Walker-Diallo was making a statement, one that bears thinking about.
Islam is unique in that it is a political ideology hidden inside a religion. And it mandates two codes of conduct,one towards Muslims and another towards everyone else. This is spelled out many places in the Qu'ran, for instance here: "Muslims are harsh against the unbelievers, merciful to one another." - 48:25.
It likewise demonizes non-Muslims:
Qu'ran 4:101 - The unbelievers are your inveterate foe. Qu'ran 9: 73 - Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.
Qu'ran 33:60 - Allah has cursed the unbelievers and proposed for them a blazing hell.
Qu'ran 98:51 - The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of hell. They are the vilest of all creatures.
Qu'ran 9:123 - O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard against evil.
Qu'ran 8:12 - I will cast fear into the hearts of the unbelievers. Therefore behead them and cut off all their fingertips.
Qu'ran 5:15 - O you who believe! Do not take Jews and Christians as friends and protectors. Whoever turns to them as friends and protectors is one of them.
There's a lot more of this sort of thing throughout the Qu'ran, to the point where demonizing non-believers and exhortations of violence against them could even be called a main theme of the book. The Hadiths, containing the deeds and sayings of Mohammed according to his followers have even more of this type of material.
And these scriptures are the basis for sharia, a code that almost 60% of US Muslims say they would prefer to live under here in America according to the latest Pew poll. Sharia mandates death for homosexuals, inequality for women, and allows wife beating and clitorectomies according to the interpretation by all four Muslim fiqhs. It makes non-Muslims into dhimmis ('protected people') with no rights except to pay exorbitant taxes for the privilege of being allowed to live among Muslims as second class citizens. Dhimmis do not even have the right to testify in a court of law. Their entire existence is subject to the whim of their Muslim conquerors.
More importantly, sharia is not some dusty scriptural antique. Sharia and laws based on Sharia are being practiced in a large part of the world today.
But wait, there's more. The Qu'ran allows taqiyyah, which allows Muslims to lie to infidels to advance Islam.
Given these realities, is a Muslim judge - or any Muslim public official - whom swears an oath on a book that is diametrically opposed to our laws and the Constitution to be taken seriously? Could a judge who swears on the Qu'ran be expected to rule fairly in a case involving a Muslim defendant and say, a Jewish plaintiff? Or in one involving a custody case between a Muslim man and an infidel woman? Could a congressman who swears an oath on a Qu'ran be expected to adhere to that oath in the event of a conflict or disagreement with an Islamic nation? Or when it comes to voting on security policies designed to protect America from terrorist attacks emanating from Muslim nations? Which comes first, the Muslim umma or their oath of office?
In the case of Judge Walker-Diallo I would much have preferred an oath or affirmation without any religious book in preference to the Qu'ran. She was certainly within her rights to use a Qu'ran and at this point I have to give her the benefit of the doubt. There is and should be no test of faith in America to hold office. But as I've noted, Islam is unique among religions. Simply speaking, Islam does not play well with others.
And thus, this sort of thing bears very very careful watching.
"If there were a real press in this country, someone would ask Obama how it is that he became the first president to host a Rose Garden celebration for a deserter."
Having heard all of last night's debate, here are a few things I took away from it.
While many people expected Trump and Cruz to have at it, I didn't. In fact when the CNN talking head tried to provoke it by asking Trump about his reference to Ted Cruz as 'a bit of a maniac', Trump just looked at Ted Cruz, both of them laughed out loud and the Donald answered by saying, “I’ve gotten to know him over the past few days. He has a wonderful temperament.Nah, he's alright" mocking the CNN host ( I believe it was Dana Bash) for trying to provoke a fight between the two.
The fisticuffs I did expect were between Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and they definitely went at it. As the new GOP establishment dedicated candidate, Rubio saw it as his job to assault Ted Cruz and try to move into second place. CNN and some of the GOP establishment friendly hosts on Salem gave him a huge assist, seeing to it that he got more time than any other candidate with the possible exception of Donald Trump. Based on the polls, Rubio didn't succeed.
One of the best lines of the night came when Marco Rubio tried to defend his record on illegal migration by saying that Ted Cruz had his own things to answer for without going into specifics. Cruz's response was that comparing his position to Rubio’s was like “suggesting the firefighter and the arsonist have the same record at the scene of the fire.”
Not only couldn't he hold his own against Ted Cruz, but there was an assist from Rand Paul who attacked Rubio on his misstatements about the government surveillance program and about his stance on illegal migration,cutting him to the bone at one point by saying Rubio was more loyal to Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer than conservative principles. Rand Paul's point, as usual was succinct - how can Marco Rubio try to paint himself as a national security candidate when he's so weak on border security and illegal migration?
Rand Paul also had sharp words for the bufoonish Chris Christie. When Christie started yakking it up about a no fly zone in Syria and said he’d shoot down Russian planes in a no-fly zone if necessary, Rand Paul looked at him the way a scientist looks at a bug in a microscope, pointed at him and said, “If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate.”
Also of interest was Donald Trump's response to criticism by Jeb Bush:
I'll be very surprised if Jeb Bush lasts much beyond Iowa.
One interesting poll reflecting the impact of the debate was Drudge's online poll. which pretty much reflects exactly where most polls have the candidates:
TRUMP - 43%
CRUZ - 27%
PAUL - 13%
RUBIO - 8%
The Real Clear Politics average has Trump nationally at 33%, Cruz at 16.5% and Rubio and Ben Carson tied at around 12%. In Iowa, Cruz actually leads Trump by about a point, while Donald Trump is solidly ahead in New Hampshire.
Realistically, we're down to a top tier of four GOP candidates at most - Trump, Cruz, Rubio and Carson. Of the four, Carson is already fading away, but after last night his place could be taken by Rand Paul.
Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.
You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.
To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning
Simple, no?
It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?
Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Is It Time For A Third Party?
Bookworm Room: It's time to take over the GOP, but not to divide it so that the Democrats can conquer.
The Glittering Eye :No. Duverger's Law is the rule-of-thumb in political science that says that two party systems ultimately emerge in plurality rule systems with single member districts while proportional representation systems tend to be multi-party.
In other words the conditions for a third party can't be favorable without electoral reform.
I think we're either nearing a Constitutional Convention or an actual rebellion.
The Razor : Only if it replaces the Republican Party.
JoshuaPundit : I see the majority of the American people as being between a rock and a hard place.
On the one hand, the Democrats have truly become what Barack Obama and George Soros wanted to create - an ultra Left, corrupt socialist party utterly opposed to most of the Constitution with suicidal views on national security and illegal migration. And for good measure, a nice side order of fiscal irresponsibility, ultra high taxation, and exacerbated racial unrest.
It is exactly the kind of party a corrupt snake like Mrs. Clinton was born to lead. And the fact that someone with her record and moral character has at least a 50% chance of polluting the Oval Office with her presence is a grim testimony to the state of our politics and our Fourth Estate.
On the other hand, we have the Republican Party, whose leadership long ago ceased to represent anyone except itself, let alone the people whom dutifully voted for it and gave it majorities in congress that were marketed to them as what was needed to stop the dangerous decline of the country. Here, we have a whole infrastructure of politicians and elites who essentially regard the people they supposedly represent as a damned nuisance who should shut up and simply get behind whatever they've decided this year's product with an 'R' on it is going to be.
The whole situation resembles nothing so much as a famous Simpson's cartoon where two space aliens, Kang and Kodos seek to conquer and enslave America by posing as the two presidential candidates:
As far as the GOP goes, it's gotten so toxic that the Republican establishment is signalling openly that if the peasants are so uppity as to pick Ted Cruz, Donald Trump or anyone else who's unwilling to go along with their agenda, they'll try and sandbag them by having a brokered convention to pick one of their own chosen ones. And if that doesn't work, they're actually prepared to do whatever they can to throw the election to the Democrats and try and use the old tired formula again in 2020.
So, a third party? Lots of pros and cons.
The way the system is set up, it's very tough to get on the ballot in all fifty states let alone set up the infrastructure to compete nationally. The obvious historical precedent is that of the Whigs, who imploded over the slavery issue and gave birth to the Republicans. The fledgling Republican Party lost their first election badly,in 1854. They won the next one, in 1860, but it's not usually remembered that there were five parties competing that year and the GOP squeaked by on a minority vote.
Another con is the obvious one...that splitting the Republican Party almost guarantees that Hillary Clinton will be the next president, with all that entails.
The pros? How about the possibility of no choice? Without an open, vociferous revolt, I don't see the Republican party being taken away from those whom now hold it. Either Trump or Ted Cruz would have to have such an overwhelming amount of delegates as to make a brokered convention impossible, and there's no way of forcing people whom despise them and their supporters to work to get a Cruz or a Trump elected. At best, many of them may sit on their hands and do little or nothing and at worse they will simply vote for Mrs. Clinton as more than one of them have suggested.
Is it possible to win the White House without their support? It all depends on how many of them dial out, how fed up the American people are, how successful outright voter fraud is and how the campaign itself goes. These things can hinge on small events. The way I see it, at this point in time Mrs. Clinton has a probable 237 electoral votes going in, including the entire West Coast, Hawaii, New Mexico, Minnesota, Illinois, DC, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York and all of New England except perhaps New Hampshire. And that assumes that the Democrats don't also take Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin,Colorado, Nevada, Florida, Virginia or North Carolina. Pennsylvania and either Michigan, North Carolina or Virginia alone give her the winning number of 270. It isn't an impossible map in 2016, but it's no picnic. And there's a distinct possibility it may be our last real election as a Republic.
I'm not trying to be discouraging here. The map can get better depending on events, the GOP elephant might pull together and rouse itself for one more charge with the first real conservative candidate since Ronaldus Maximus (perhaps with a more 'moderate' VP as a sop to the Establishment, which is usually how these things get done). And we maybe able to start rebuilding the country again.
But if the GOP implodes because the establishment tries to sabotage a conservative candidate, or because they succeed one way or the other in giving us a Kang or Kodos choice, a third party isn't a choice. It's a necessity.
Greg Aydt, Rhymes With Right : I'm starting to think yes -- and I say this as someone who has spent the last 35 years as an active Republican and the last 15 as an elected member of my county Republican Executive Committee.
Let's look at things. The Democrats have moved so far left that they have become Euro-socialists even as the Euro-socialists move to the right because their experiment has been failing for some time. The Republicans are on the verge of being taken over by latter-day Know-Nothings seeking to close the borders, impose religious tests for office and (in some cases) proposing secession -- an existential threat that rivals Watwrgatw. So tell me -- where is there room for those of us who occupy the center-right that was exemplified by Ronald Reagan? I'm beginning to wonder if there needs to be some new vehicle for the sane center of the United States.
The problem, of course, consists in two realities.
First, the two parties have rigged our nation's election laws to keep third parties marginalized by limiting ballot access. The major parties have automatic access to the ballot, while everyone else faces onerous signature or financial requirements to do so.
Second, in our system it is virtually impossible for more than two parties to thrive in the long term. In the last 25 presidential elections there have been four major efforts at running a major third party candidate for president. Each of those parties has not only failed to win, but has failed to even field a significant candidate four years later as one or the other major parties shifted enough to absorb most of the insurgent party's voters.
What I guess I'm saying is that there is little chance of such a party making a go of it in the long term. The best that could be hoped for is that one or the other party might be dragged away from the ideological precipice on which they stand.
GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD : No and no. The third part meme sounds great perhaps from a purely partisan view (naturally), yet it's a path to defeat and the inauguration of HRC as the 45th President of the United States.
Laura Rambeau Lee,Right Reason : Unfortunately the time has run out for a third party to be an effective option for the 2016 presidential race. What we have today are essentially two progressive big government parties. The Democrat Party exists to advance the socialist/communist agenda. The Republican Party is not much better and has lost all direction by trying to bring in non-conservatives they believe they need to win a majority. The party may be the friend of big business but they refuse to take a stand for the social issues and traditions of American culture which have made this country great.
After delivering a Republican House majority in 2010 and Senate majority in 2014 one would think the Republicans would acknowledge the hard work and commitment of the conservatives within the party and try to incorporate more of their values and address their issues. Instead we have been taken for granted and used to advance the power of the GOP. In 2012 they ran Mitt Romney against the wishes of most conservatives and failed to defeat President Obama, which should have been easy considering the actions and scandals piling up during his first term. They continue to treat conservatives as a small inconsequential group within the party even though we have been their staunchest supporters.
Since I do not believe a third party is a viable option at this time, we conservatives have to demand the Republican Party accept the candidate we choose; a candidate who can communicate with all Americans and show them where we as a country have gone off course and how he or she will effect true change by restoring American pride, traditions, and culture. Obama promised hope and change but people are realizing the change he promised was not what they envisioned, and many have lost hope. We need someone who can help restore to Americans their spirit of ingenuity, self-determination, freedom, and independence. We need someone who will return government to its rightful place in America; a government that serves the people.
Well, there you have it.
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning. It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?
