Monday, October 31, 2016

Obama DOJ Moving Quickly To Quash New Clinton Email Scandal

Loretta Lynch and the Obama Department of Justice aren't wasting any time in moving to try and stomp on and defuse the latest Clinton e-mail scandal.

Remember how slo-oow things moved when congress wanted a subpoena complied with or someone like Judicial Watch wanted a response to an FOIA request?

Now things are going to be rushed with lightening speed in an attempt to save the corrupt Mrs. Clinton and her campaign. They may have claimed it took months to go through what was left of Hillary's emails which totaled out at less than 5% of what they found on Weiner/Huma's 's laptop. But when it comes to the 650,000 emails found on Huma and Weiner's laptop, hey, different story.

The FBI had already said they planned to make a preliminary assessment of those 650,000 emails within several weeks. But the Obama DOJ is cracking the whip on the Bureau. Now they're  telling  us with a straight face that the FBI will have a 'preliminary assessment' of Weiner's 650,000 emails 'within a matter of days!'

And who's in charge of the 'investigation' proves the fix is already in.

Yes, a senior DOJ official has sent a letter to lawmakers responding to their  request for more information about email review, saying the preliminary assessment completed in 8 days. Yes,you heard that right...they'll zip through 650,000 e-mails in 8 days.

And that senior DOJ official? None other than Peter Kadzic, one of John Podesta's closest friends!  That's whose going to be in charge of what's supposed to be an impartial investigationof Huma Abedin and Mrs. Clinton. This is as incestuous as it gets:
As the Daily Caller noted, the dinner arrangement "is just the latest example of an apparent conflict of interest between the Clinton campaign and the federal agency charged with investigating the former secretary of state’s email practices." As one former U.S. Attorney tells told the DC, the exchanges are another example of the Clinton campaign’s “cozy relationship” with the Obama Justice Department.

The hacked emails confirm that Podesta and Kadzik were in frequent contact. In one email from January, Kadzik and Podesta, who were classmates at Georgetown Law School in the 1970s, discussed plans to celebrate Podesta’s birthday. And in another sent last May, Kadzik’s son emailed Podesta asking for a job on the Clinton campaign.

“The political appointees in the Obama administration, especially in the Department of Justice, appear to be very partisan in nature and I don’t think had clean hands when it comes to the investigation of the private email server,” says Matthew Whitaker, the executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, a government watchdog group.

“It’s the kind of thing the American people are frustrated about is that the politically powerful have insider access and have these kind of relationships that ultimately appear to always break to the benefit of Hillary Clinton,” he added, comparing the Podesta-Kadzik meetings to the revelation that Attorney General Loretta Lynch met in private with Bill Clinton at the airport in Phoenix days before the FBI and DOJ investigating Hillary Clinton.

Kadzik's role at the DOJ, where he started in 2013, is particularly notable Kadzik, as helped spearhead the effort to nominate Lynch, who was heavily criticized for her secret meeting with the former president.

It gets better because, as we further revealed, if there is one person in the DOJ who is John Podesta's, and thus the Clinton Foundation's inside man, it is Peter Kadjik.

Kadzik represented Podesta during the Monica Lewinsky investigation. And in the waning days of the Bill Clinton administration, Kadzik lobbied Podesta on behalf of Marc Rich, the fugitive who Bill Clinton controversially pardoned on his last day in office. That history is cited by Podesta in another email hacked from his Gmail account. In a Sept. 2008 email, which the Washington Free Beacon flagged last week, Podesta emailed an Obama campaign official to recommend Kadzik for a supportive role in the campaign.

So now we can pretty much guess what's next. Kadzik will make sure only a small portion of the emails are examined, and we'll get a report in five days or so that there's nothing there to implicate Mrs. Clinton or Huma Abedin in any wrong doing, after which the rest of the unreviewed e-mails will be destroyed.

After which the Clinton media will of course trumpet Hillary's 'exoneration.'

This kind of perversion of justice and the law is a great reason to vote against Mrs. Clinton and for a change from this kind of routine corruption all by itself.

Trending Now on Wow! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

Behind The Smoke And Mirrors -The New Clinton Email Scandal Explained 

 Forum: Is The Conservative Movement Dead? 

 The Bookworm Beat 10/31/16 — the scary Halloween illustrated edition 

 Brazil: Rio goes for Republican 

 Hidden Hollywood: Fay Wray, Beauty and the Beasts, Part III 

 Is #Weiner talking about #Dickileaks? And how bad is it? 

 The Bookworm Beat 10/30/16 — the #Dickileaks and Hillary illustrated edition 

 It Won’t End Until Hillary Does 

 Has the internet made us too dumb to understand #Dickileaks? 

 Guns are to blame? No Thug Culture is 

 The Clinton Crime Family: Well, Duh! 

 Selfie Indulgence

 [VIDEO] “Hillary Clinton is the most anti-Israel candidate in history.”

Forum: Is The Conservative Movement Dead?

Every week on Monday, the WoW! community 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 The Conservative Movement Dead?

 Stately McDaniel Manor: Is The Conservative Movement Dead? Of course. It died long ago. It’s intellectual successor, the Tea Parties, are essentially moribund, at least for now. The problem is essentially one of definition.

What, exactly, is conservatism? At one time, it was clearly based on limited government, the idea that that government is best which governs least. The government that has little or no consequence in the lives of Americans is the ideal. Government should exist only to accomplish those things we cannot do ourselves, such as raise and maintain a military, etc.

Then came the exceptions. The Moral Majority took conservatism into America’s bedrooms, demanding a say in moral choices that should have been off limits to conservatives. How do we justify the principle that government should not interfere in citizen’s lawful, personal choices when conservatives make exceptions for abortion, for example? Oh, but that’s murder! No it isn’t, or at least it never has been, even in states that seriously restricted or banned it prior to Roe v. Wade.

Oh, but aren’t we going to have people marrying parakeets then? Won’t they force us to let men use the same bathrooms as little girls?

We’ll still be a nation of laws, where the majority rules. We’re now a nation ruled by executive fiat, administrative fiat, and unelected, unaccountable judges. As Sarah Palin would say, “How’s that workin’ out for ya?”

Lest anyone think I’m staking out a position on the abortion issue, think again. I’m merely picking a bit of low-hanging philosophical fruit in the service of pointing out the problem: once conservatism began making exceptions to the principles of strictly limited government, there was no end to exceptions, and they soon became the rule.

Take another example: federal involvement in education. There is nothing inherently conservative about running American’s neighborhood schools out of Washington DC, yet that’s exactly what we now have, and something one can legitimately blame on George W. Bush. “No Child Left Behind,” for example, which imposed mandatory, high stakes testing on the nation, was created in close cooperation with Teddy Kennedy. He was conservative, wasn’t he? Oh, and he loved him some women!

Conservatism can only survive by adopting immutable and simple principles, and sticking to them. They would obviously include: absolute fidelity to the Constitution. If the Constitution doesn’t allow it, it isn’t done. If the Constitution is silent, the Tenth Amendment rules. Strict laws that make it impossible for anyone to become rich as a public servant. Complete reform of the Income Tax code. Complete reform--and strict enforcement of--of immigration law. Complete reform of civil service law to make it easy, while upholding everyone rights, to fire incompetent, criminal federal employees. Laws requiring the imprisonment of anyone in the VA mistreating our veterans. No laws written we’re not willing to enforce. Want to make a statement? Get a blog.

The list goes on, but you get the idea. Conservatives revere the Founders and the inherent goodness and industry of the American people. They believe Americans are more than smart enough to know what is good for them, and government must be as small and non-intrusive as possible.

Oh, and the Federal Bureau of Bedsheet Thread Count doesn’t need a SWAT team and automatic weapons either.

 Don Surber : Let's see, conservatives own most statehouses and governorships in my lifetime. Rare time they control both houses of Congress. And likely to knock off a Clinton.If that's dead, I wish we died in 2006.

 Bookworm Room: I agree with Don. I think the Republican party is dead (or, frankly, should be), but I think the conservative movement is alive and well.

JoshuaPundit: Of course it's dead, no matter how you try and finesse it:

Let's indeed get on with it.

The conservative movement or what has passed for it is indeed dead, although many of its ideas survive. The brand name has been totally compromised because of its association with the Republican Party. Conservative Inc. with some honorable exceptions for all intents and purposes became part of the GOP. It conserved nothing and created little except cushy jobs and fat paychecks for those on the inside.

It betrayed its adherents and supporters at every turn,and when forced to appear to move towards conservative principals by the Tea Party and by selfless advocates like Sarah Palin and Jim DeMint, it simply ignored those principles once it got into power and kicked Palin and DeMint out of the party.

It cheerfully refused to defend what were supposed to be its values and betrayed its supporters when it came to education, trade deals, outsourcing, same sex marriage, downsizing our military, separation of powers, illegal migration, fiscal responsibility, and a ruinous ObamaCare bill that cost the country millions, made healthcare far less affordable and converted thousands of jobs from full time to part time.

In a final betrayal, much of Conservative Inc. and the GOP it allied itself with the likes of the Clintons in an attempt to destroy a nominee who was overwhelmingly the voter's choice, because he pledged to try to fix what was wrong, drain the swamp and threatened to spoil the obscene orgy in DC.

We're definitely going to need to consolidate a new political movement in this country, one that actually embraces limited government, our Constitution, economic growth and lower taxation, a strong foreign policy and policies that limit the opportunities for crony capitalism, protect domestic manufacturing grow the pie and promote fiscal sanity. Think of it as a sort of combo of what the Tea Party was about and traditional Jacksonian values. But we had best call it something else and purge much of the GOP and Conservative Inc. from it or they will simply corrupt it the same way they corrupted the conservative movement once Reagan left office and the Bushes took over.

Mene mene tekel uparsin. These 'conservatives' have been weighed and found wanting. Our Forefathers had the wisdom to purge the Tories in their midst, and we should emulate them when it comes to our own revolution.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason : The conservative movement is far from dead, but it is in trouble. The left run mainstream media controls public discourse and relentlessly criticizes, vilifies, and mocks conservatives. They portray conservatives as Bible reading gun clingers; relics of the past whose beliefs and convictions have no place in today’s society. Fortunately with the internet and social media platforms, along with talk radio which has been around for decades, conservatives are communicating their positions on political and cultural issues.

The silent majority has once again awakened and is attempting to restore conservative values and ideals to our government and our culture. We need to work on two fronts. First with government, conservatives must come forward and run for office at every level from local city councils and county school boards and commissions through the state and federal government. Our bigger challenge is with our culture. In order to restore traditional Judeo-Christian values to our country we need to work through the schools and educate our children and teach them the truth, not the America bashing, global warming, globalist indoctrination that has been going on for decades.

Conservatism is not dead. But we have a lot of work to do to restore our government and our culture. We have to understand the work we are doing, the groundwork we are laying, might not benefit us immediately but will lead to a better America for future generations. 
Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Behind The Smoke And Mirrors -The New Clinton Email Scandal Explained;0xw,0.009230769230769232xh&resize=1200:*&output-format=image/jpeg&output-quality=75

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive! " - Sir Walter Scott

The latest bombshell to hit this already explosive campaign season is an announcement by FBI director James Comey that the FBI has opened up a new investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal...and that Clinton's special assistant Huma Abedin and her 'husband' Anthony Weiner are involved.

As usual with Clinton Inc., this is a really tangled web, so let's examine what's going on, and of course, what it means.

First, let's quickly review:

As you know, Hillary Clinton went through what passed for an investigation into the felonies she committed as Secretary of State with her illegal, unprotected private servers and her careless handling of classified materials in violation of the Official Records Act. She has said repeatedly that she told the FBI that she had turned over all her e-mails. We certainly don't know if she actually did, because she deleted 32,000 of them without turning them over and than used a software called Bleachbit to destroy any possibility of recovering them. Since the FBI didn't even record her interview or make a transcript, that's where that stands.

Moreover, the FBI gave Clinton aide Cheryl Mills immunity while allowing her attorney client privilege (unheard of in these circumstances where someone being interviewed is a possible target) in exchange for her turning over her laptop...which they destroyed even though it had been subpoenaed by congress as evidence.

Basically the fix was in and Bill Clinton's little 45 minute meeting with AG Loretta Lynch aboard her private plane - just by chance, of course - was obviously to work out the details and and reaffirm Mrs. Clinton wasn't going to be charged because the Obama Department of Justice would tell FBI Director James Comey they weren't going to prosecute. And as the Wall Street Journal reveals, that Lynch and her DOJ goons would make sure there wasn't going to be any investigation of the Clinton Foundation.

So one day later, having gotten his orders from Lynch and the DOJ, Comey went to the unusual extent of calling a press conference, went over all the reasons Hillary Clinton should have been charged and then finessed it by saying that he would recommend no charges be filed.

While that caused a firestorm at the time in many quarters, Democrats acted as though Comey deserved the Medal of Honor. They lauded his ethics, praised him to the hilt and the Media rejoiced.

Then last week, FBI Director Comey suddenly announced that the FBI was opening a new investigation on the Clinton e-mails.

You see, Clinton shadow Huma Abedin has told the FBI that she had turned over all of her e-mails and all of her devices. Apparently she didn't, and a new batch of 650,000 emails were found on a laptop belonging to - wait for it - Abedin's hubby, none other than the infamous Anthony Weiner!


Here's the New York Times bewailing the sad news but unable to avoid reporting it, because everyone else was:

Federal law enforcement officials said Friday that the new emails uncovered in the closed investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server were discovered after the F.B.I. seized electronic devices belonging to Huma Abedin, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton, and her husband, Anthony Weiner.

The F.B.I. is investigating illicit text messages that Mr. Weiner sent to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. The bureau told Congress on Friday that it had uncovered new emails related to the Clinton case -- one federal official said they numbered in the thousands -- potentially reigniting an issue that has weighed on the presidential campaign and offering a lifeline to Donald J. Trump less than two weeks before the election.

Comey's letter to Chaffetz said:

"In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation … I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation."

Aiyeee! I have a feeling that Weiner, with nothing left to lose told the FBI what he had and cut a deal.

Of course, no sooner had Comey announced this then he went from being a Democrat hero to someone who was a law breaker, who was 'endangering the election process,' 'unethical.' and a disgrace. Apparently, Comey announced this even though he was ordered not to by the Obama department of Justice and Loretta Lynch.

I have to admit to a nasty laugh or three as I watch the same people who applauded Comey when he interfered in an election by getting Clinton off the hook now want him burnt at the stake:

 Trey Gowdy a distinguished ex-prosecutor is entirely correct, of course. Hillary Clinton made the decisions that led to this state of affairs, and for her or her creatures to blame anyone else is just ridiculous, just an attempt at the old shell game to get people's attention diverted.

So why did Comey do this? And why now?

Since the investigation of Hillary Clinton's e-mails and the Clinton Foundation were deliberately stonewalled and set aside by the Obama Justice Department , there's been a major morale problem at the Bureau according to various sources. Comey understandably had lost the respect of many of the agents, there are quite a few resignation letters on his desk and it's at the point where, reportedly, a number of people won't even return his greetings and limit their interaction with him as much as possible. Reportedly, even his wife was disappointed in him and kept urging him to admit he was wrong when he said Hillary shouldn't be charged.

This was perhaps a way of trying to recover a little self respect and mollify folks he works with by actually pursuing an investigation. Certainly he's not doing it to win friends and influence people having alienated most of DC.

Another reason is that having seen the reeking criminality of the Clintons up close, he might actually have had some pang of conscience over what her becoming president might actually mean for America. People who work in law and law enforcement have, typically, an inordinate respect for the law, what it means, how it works and what it does. The idea of seeing an unrepentant criminal like Hillary Clinton become president might have been just too much for James Comey to stomach.

So what effect is all this going to have? What's likely to happen?

In spite of what the media is saying, Hillary Clinton's huge drop in the polls was already a fact before this came out. Like James Comey, apparently a lot of people are doing some serious thinking about whether they really want Hillary Clinton in the White House with all that entails. This latest revelation won't help, of course, but the Wikileaks releases, Mrs. Clinton's conduct during the campaign, total disgust at the ridiculously partisan media and a desire for real change have all had an effect. This last item just cements what was already apparent.

Comey could be fired by President Obama, but at this point that might almost be a relief for him. Like Anthony Weiner, James Comey has nothing left to lose. It would also give even more credence to Mrs. Clinton's having a lot to hide if it appeared he were being punished merely for doing his job. The optics wouldn't look good. But don't be surprised if Comey 'resigns' after the election during Obama's lame duck period..and if I were him, I would seriously watch my six. These are ruthless and very vindictive people he's dealing with here.

That said, don't expect anything serious to come of this. It's already a known fact that President Obama lied openly about not knowing about Mrs. Clinton's illegal e-mail setup and even sent her e-mails on it, which is exactly why he invoked executive privilege on any emails using the alias he created. But if Mrs. Clinton looks like she's going to be convicted of anything, she knows where a lot of bodies are buried, can cut a deal and implicate him.

If he's elected, President Trump might very well decide to walk back his pledge to investigate Hillary completely since he has to know where that's going to end up leading. While both these vampires rate a stake in the heart, perhaps just getting them off America's neck and concentrating on fixing the massive damage they did might be more constructive than putting them in orange jump suits as guests of the Federal government, as justified as that would be.

Friday, October 28, 2016

Two Eminent Rabbis On The Election...

 Image result for Rabbi with Torah scrolls

It's a foregone conclusion that a majority of the secular, non-religious Jewish vote will go to Mrs. Clinton for reasons I've explored already here. So I found the reactions of two well known and highly regarded Rabbis, both with secular educations as well as religious ones to be of interest.

First here's Rabbi Dov Fischer Esq*., who has served two three-year terms on the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America during the past seven years, is a professor of the law of Torts and of Civil Procedure at two major Southern California law schools and is The Rabbi of Young Israel in Orange County, California. Here's what he had to say:

I am an Orthodox rabbi. I am also an attorney and an adjunct professor of law. I clerked 20 years ago for the Hon. Danny J. Boggs in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Judge Boggs, one of the most brilliant minds I ever have known in any of my walks of life, soon thereafter served as chief judge of the Sixth Circuit.

Of course, I am disgusted by the stories that dominate the election campaign. I am disgusted as a law professor, an attorney, a father of daughters, and as a rabbi. Women making accusations that they have been sexually abused — Paula Corbin Jones who received an $850,000 settlement from Bill Clinton; Kathleen Willey who went to Bill Clinton in the White House, desperate for a job after her husband killed himself; Juanita Broaddrick, a Clinton volunteer who insists he raped her; the new list of women whose names I am only now learning who say that Donald Trump groped or kissed them against their will. The abused women whose reputations and lives were destroyed by Hillary Clinton, as she defended her husband’s public profile after each “bimbo eruption.” Hillary referred to victims as “looney tunes” and worse, her team including the likes of James Carville and Sidney Blumenthal characterized them as “trailer trash,” and Hillary most infamously ruined the life of 12-year-old Kathy Shelton, raped by a 41-year-old whom Hillary was required to defend. There was nothing wrong in Hillary defending—every accused criminal deserves a good defense. But Hillary destroyed the girl in the process and proceeded years later laughing about that case and regaling an interviewer with anecdotes of that tragedy.

All of it disgusts me. So I have decided that on November 8 I am not going to vote for Clinton or Trump. Instead, I am going to vote for the federal judiciary. Along the way, I also am going to vote for an authentic economic recovery that will include repatriating trillions of dollars back home, for a stronger American footprint in the world, for a border that will protect Mexico from free-flowing American weapons that feed their drug cartels and that will protect America from the influx of potential terrorists and murderous drugs that now easily can pour through our porous borders. 

I am going to vote for a process that restores civil harmony in the inner cities by restoring respect for law enforcement even as we begin to address legitimate concerns that responsible African Americans have raised about bias. I am going to vote against sanctuary cities. I am going to vote for a stronger military that, after the past eight years, we now unfortunately will need to protect from Iranian terror exports and North Korean adventurism. 

I am going to vote for an end to bullying and ceaselessly blaming and threatening Israel, our strongest and only truly reliable ally in the Middle East, the only country in that region that truly shares America’s deepest values. And I am going to vote to stem the perilous slide away from America’s traditional social core values of hard work, self-help, trust in G-d, respect for religion’s central place in our lives, and the sanctity of life.

If we do not have a robust rebound from the terrible recession of nearly a decade ago, let it not be because I voted based on some filthy talk that a candidate spoke 11 years ago. Let young Americans in our inner cities not continue to die in an endless spiral of gang violence because a tape recorded braggart childishly impressed a gullible young news journalist. And how sad it is to see men—Hillary’s male enablers like John Podesta, Rob Mook, Bill Clinton, and others no less cynical on the other side—preying on women’s legitimate and decent values by trying to sway voting blocs one way or the other based on issues other than the life-and-death concerns on today’s table.

How will we explain to our sons or grandsons who one day would be sent overseas to fight to stop an enriched Iran—nuclear-enriched, hundreds of billions enriched—when America’s continued weakness and failure to stand strong now ultimately will leave us with no choice but to fight later? Shall we tell them: “Well, you see, we did not elect the candidate who would have stood stronger because  11 years earlier he was recorded saying the most disgusting things as he bragged on a bus to an impressionable journalist?”

(more at the link)

Then, here's Rabbi Mendel Kessin, who has a PHD in psychology, practices privately and is widely regarded as one of America's most eminent Torah scholars. His bio is here:

Rav Kessin also approaches this with the insight you'd expect of a Torah Gadolim of his eminence. You vote to keep the singularly corrupt, dishonest and incompetent  leader out of the White House, not  because of a 11 year old illegally recorded and illegally released tape   with locker room talk on it followed by some conveniently timed unproven allegations.

One more thing. If you're female, have daughters, are gay or Jewish, voting for Hillary is suicidal. 

f you really care about women you will vote for Donald Trump instead of a candidate with serious ties to the Muslim Brotherhood who has pledged to bring in thousands of unvettable Muslim 'refugees' from the most misogynist, Jew hating, gay hating countries on earth.

if you want to see how that works out, just take a look at Europe, with its wave of sexual assaults,gay bashing and Jews afraid to walk the streets. Sweden, where rape used to be almost unheard of is now the rape capitol of the world, Amsterdam, once the most gay friendly city in the world now has gay bashing incidents on a regular basis. Jews have been advised by several EU governments NOT to go out wearing kippot, Jewish stars or anything else that clearly identifies them as Jews, and attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions have skyrocketed. In Germany, Do a search on the gang rapes in Cologne and elsewhere since Merkel imported a million 'refugees' into Germany. Or the Muslim sex grooming gangs in the UK who made money raping and 'turning out' young minor British girls as young as twelve for prostitution.

That's the kind of hell Hilary wants to import here, and she's said so openly. To vote for it is indeed suicidal.

*(Full disclosure...I know Rav Fischer slightly in an online sense and he's as razor sharp an individual as you'd care to meet)

Sunday, October 23, 2016

Forum: What Are Your Favorite Games? Why?

Every week on Monday, the WoW! community 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: What Are Your Favorite Games? Why?

 Bookworm Room :
I love playing games. Indeed, I come from the generation that still played games with other people, rather than with computers. Board games, card games, social interactive games . . . it's all good. Here, in no particular order, is a list of games that delight me:

I Doubt It (known by my children's generation as "Bullsh*t.")
Mensch ärgere Dich nicht (which I think compares to the American game of Sorry).
Yahtzee! (or as my father called it, "Poker Dice.")
Chutes and Ladders (a little children's game that I never outgrew)
Twenty questions
Mah Jong (which I haven't played in 35 years)
Cribbage (which I haven't played in 37 years)
The Game of Life (the original version, not the revamped one)
Checkers (although I can't play chess to save my life, I used to be good at checkers)
Trivial Pursuit

I also love doing jigsaw puzzles, provided that I do them with friends. 

And finally, my favorite game has no name that I know. My niece just came home from college one day and taught it to us. It's best played with around 6-8 people, although it can be played with more (we've played with 14 or even more). Everyone playing is given blank slips of paper onto which they have to write the name of a person or character. It doesn't matter if the person is living or dead, or real or fictional. The players then fold those slips in half and place them in a large bowl. The ultimate goal is to have 25-50 slips of paper in the bowl, so the number of slips a person fills out depends on the number of players. 

The group is then divided into two teams. The first round is like a guessing game. One member of the team pulls out slips of paper and, without ever mentioning name of the person on the slip of paper, tries to get his team to guess it. Thus, for Marilyn Monroe, the team member might say, "She was a big Hollywood star in the 1950s who was known for being blonde and sexy."  If his teammates look at him blankly, he keeps giving more clues. 

The goal is to get through as many slips of paper as possible within one minute. Those slips that the team guessed correctly are collected next to the bowl and the team score for that round is based upon the number of slips the team successfully guessed. The slips are not returned to the bowl under the second round.

At the minute mark, the bowl passes to the other team, which does the same thing. The two teams go back and forth until the bowl is empty. Each time a team gets the bowl, a different team member is tagged to give the clues. 

When the bowl is empty, if there's still time on the clock, the play doesn't stop. Instead, the second round begins immediately. All the slips are dumped back in the bowl and playing resumes. In round two, though, the player giving the clues is limited to one word. Marilyn Monroe is now "blonde" or "sexy." Having given the word, the clue-giver hopes that his team members make the connection, because he is limited to that one word. If his teammates don't get it . . . tough. 

This part of the game is where the fun really starts, because although people think they'll remember all the names and clues from the first round, they don't. It's funny to watch people struggle to come up with one-word clues and then sit there suffering as their teammates pull complete blanks. Of course, sometimes teams are on a roll and they may rack up 9 or 10 points in a one-minute cycle.

As with the first round, at the minute mark, the bowl passes to the other team, and so it goes, back and forth, with each team member taking turns to give one-word clues for that minute.

Round three has the same pattern as round two. If the clock is still ticking when the bowl is finally empty, the play doesn't stop. The slips of paper are once again put into the bowl and whoever is up pulls out a slip . . . but this time, the clue-giver is limited to silent charades. 

Again, in theory this seems easy, because everyone has heard the names twice before, but it's not easy at all. If you have 40, 50, or even 60 slips in the bowl, memory flies out the door.  Also, when people are time pressed, they make very funny choices when doing charades. At the end of this laugh-inducing third round, the game ends, and the team with the highest score wins.

One nuance:  The technical rule is that, once you've pulled a slip out of the bowl, you're stuck with it even if you don't know who the name is or, in round two or three, can't remember what attributes go with the name. In my house, we've had to soften this rule when playing with very different generations because the old folks and the young folks do not share a common popular culture. I don't know YouTube stars and the kids don't know historic figures. At this point, we turn to the honor system. If it's hard, the player has to do it, even if he thinks he'll wipe out during his turn. However, if he genuinely has no idea who's on the slip of paper, he can replace it in the bowl and pick out another one.

I'm sure their more games that I've forgotten. So much of my childhood was spent playing games, many of them run together in my mind.

JoshuaPundit:When I was younger I used to enjoy ping pong and pool, but I haven't played them in quite some time. Most of the games I play lately are strategy type game of one kind or another. I enjoy a game of chess and its East Asian equivalent Go when I can find someone to play with. It's interesting because the strategies involved are almost opposite in some ways. I also love backgammon.

I also find historically accurate computer strategy games interesting from time to time since I find history fascinating.  I own a copy of a SOTA very accurate Civil War simulation, a relic of a forum I once participated in that covers the entire conflict. I also have a number of modded games covering different eras of history that involve both building trade and economy as well as war strategies. Basically, these are advanced chess games with different pieces when it comes down to it!

I also used to like Sim City because building a city can be fascinating as well,but I lost interest when the game got into some of its more outre' versions.

Stately McDaniel Manor: As a youngster, I often played Monopoly with my mother and younger sister. During my high school years, I played epic games of ping pong with my best friend and others, and was reasonably accomplished, during those days, at air hockey. I even played Pong when it was first invented and was available only as an arcade game.

As time passed, I bought one of the first Atari home video systems and played Space Invaders and similar games, but as my career demanded more and more of my time, I had the choice of playing games or spending more time with my wife. It wasn’t a close choice. I played as a child and it became time to put away childish things. However, I did play Trivial Pursuit when it was new, but after one or two rounds, most people would no longer play me: I tend to remember virtually everything I read or see. I don’t imagine it was very much fun to play with me.

As video games became more and more sophisticated, I wasn’t the least tempted. Shooter games? Been there, done that in reality. Such games hold no fascination.

Now, with my musical and teaching obligations, and my writing habit (I write at least one article a day for Stately McDaniel Manor and WoW), I’ve no time for games. I have a hard enough time getting in sufficient exercise through bike rides and, occasionally, fencing and weights. I suppose those are my games these days, that and reading whenever possible. I have, with those pursuits, filled more time than most days can hold, and the intellectual stimulation games may produce, I have in spades.

I don’t look down on those that play games, I’ve simply ordered my life in ways that take their place, and wouldn’t allow them if I were inclined to want to include them.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason : My favorite games are trivia games. While I was never the last one chosen for athletic games like dodge ball I was never the first one either. I’ve always been just an average athlete.

But somewhere along the line, while everyone else was studying for tests only to quickly forget, I committed massive amounts of useless information to memory and somehow have been able to retain quite a bit of it. I am an avid Jeopardy! watcher and get an odd thrill of satisfaction when all three contestants are unable to come up with the correct answer (in the form of a question thank you) in Final Jeopardy and I know it.

When I am flying I love it when they have trivia games to play. I will usually play most of the flight and almost always end up with the highest score. When getting together with family and friends we usually end up playing games and if we play a trivia game everyone wants me on their team. So I guess while I wasn’t a great athlete I discovered and honed my own special talent and have enjoyed many hours recalling obscure facts and information to the amazement and wonder of my friends and family.

The Razor:The first video game I ever played was tennis on the Magnavox Odyssey in 1973 or 74 at a sister’s house. Since I was the youngest with grown siblings I used to play board games by myself, with the 1971 politically themed Landslide! a favorite. 5 or 6 years later I convinced my mom to buy me an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Even though we were poor and living on income from her independent sales job, she spoiled me and I found it under the Christmas tree. From that point on computer games would be a part of my life.

In 1991 the computer game Civilization was released. It almost caused me to flunk a quarter in college. For the first 3 days I stayed in my apartment in a tatty robe with little sleep, skipping classes and drinking coffee as I took over the world. Ironically this past Friday version 6 of that game was released. It is now loaded on my PC waiting for me to indulge my craving for world conques

The Glittering Eye : I guess the question of my favorite game depends on the operative definition of "game". I'll leave out kendo and judo.

I like all sorts of games. I've played bridge competitively. I like Scrabble, Anagrams, Boggle, Uno, and Trivial Pursuit. I like most board games like Monopoly, Sorry, and so on. When I was a kid I even played Barbie's Dream Date with my sisters. Once upon a time I spent hour after hour playing tactics games like Gettysburg, Stalingrad, and Tactics II.

These days the games I play most frequently are PC-based role-playing games. I've played Skyrim from beginning to end a half dozen times and right now I'm about midway through my seventh playthrough of Dragon Age: Inquisition.

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Now Trending on WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

Debate Number Three – A Clear Choice

Debate Number Three - A Clear Choice

Watching the debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the first thing I was struck by was how different things were with a moderator who wasn't part of Team Clinton. Chris Wallace is a Democrat, but he's a journalist first and he went out of his way to keep things balanced and on a professional level. There was only one question he asked Trump that I felt was somewhat out of line, but we'll get to that.

That's a 180 degree change from the partisan presstitutes who ran the other debates, and while he won't get any roses from the Left, he deserves congratulations for a job well done.

His greatest accomplish, I think, is that the country now has a pretty good idea of the directions each would take the country.

They can see the difference between Trump's growing the pie and creating real growth as opposed to Hillary Clinton's eat the rich formula ala' Hugo Chavez.

They can see the difference between business as usual and real change.

They can see the change between hope and continued decline and despair.

Mrs. Clinton's goal was to show Trump as unfit for office, dodge any tough questions thrown at her and stay erect for 90 minutes. She failed the first one, had very mixed results on the second that only worked because she outright lied about a number of things and wasn't challenged. She managed the last one thanks to an unknown Dr. Feelgood.

Trump's goal was to appear presidential, challenge Mrs. Clinton's record and give Americans a sense of who he is and where he would take the country. I'd give him an acceptable score on the first and somewhat higher scores on the second and third.

If this was a boxing match, ten point system, I'd score it 6-4 Trump, maybe 7-3.

I think he would have scored better if he said the following:

Challenged Hillary Clinton on the Heller decision, which had nothing to do with toddlers. Yes, she actually said it was about toddlers having access to guns!

What it was actually about was whether Anthony Heller, a 66-year-old police officer, should be legally allowed to own and bear a personal firearm to defend himself and his family at home. That’s the whole shebang, and the 110 page transcript doesn't even mention toddlers. So she lied, and it's a pity Trump didn't call her on it. I also wish he'd mentioned that contrary to her supporting the Second Amendment,Wikileaks has revealed she's planning a gun grab by executive order. Her nonsense about 'the gun show loophole' also needed to be shredded on national TV for all to see.

When Hillary started bloviating about a no-fly zone in Syria which in effect would protect jihadis, a great response would have been 'That's exactly what you and Barack Obama did in Libya, use our air force to protect jihadis in Benghazi, depose Khaddaffi, allow his arsenals to fall into the jihadist's hands and create a terrorist Disneyland. Hundreds were killed in Libya, Algeria, Mali, and Nigeria because of you, and now you want to do the same thing in Syria?'

Mrs. Clinton's rant about Trump being 'Putin's puppet' could have been shut down hard by simply saying 'If the Russians, Chinese,Iran or whoever hacked into classified material, it's because of your illegal private server that had no protection whatsoever. When you meet these leaders and they hand you a folder with copies of all the e-mails about your crooked deals you thought you deleted, you'll be the one who's the puppet.'

Indeed she will. This isn't someone we should ever trust with national security. And that $6 billion Trump was talking about? No, it hasn't been 'debunked' and no one knows where the money is, although I have an idea where it went and who wound up with it.

The biggest moment is when Hillary was caught flat-footed by Trump as he named the misogynist Muslim nation who treat women horribly and suggested that she give the millions of dollars they've given her back. Her face was something to see and could have curdled fresh milk.

The one thing the Clinton media is going crazy over (because they have nothing else) is a question Chris Wallace asked Trump. Would he accept the results of the election? Trump's answer was perfectly proper. He simply said "I'll let you know when I see them."

The Democrats are the same people who went bats over their failed attempt to steal Florida in 2000, who went around saying, 'Bush isn't my president' are now crazed by Donald Trump refusing to give up his options? Hillary Clinton herself says that Al Gore 'won' the 2000 election. In fact, Democrats have challenged the results of elections they lost over eight times.

In view of James O'Keefe's revelations on voter fraud, dirty tactics and rigged elections, on what's come out via wikileaks, Trump has every right to say he'll wait and see. You'll notice the media is ignoring that particular story:

Even a casual perusal of wikileaks reveals the corruption of the leadership of the Democrat Party. The Democrats could justifiably be called the party of voter fraud and this election has a lot at stake for the powers that be and the establishment. Trump is totally correct that the system is rigged and that includes our election process. No less than one of Hillary's campaign managers John Podesta was caught by wikileaks saying that as far as he's concerned, illegal migrants are allowed to vote if they have a driver's license, something that's already a reality in California.

There are two ways our elections are rigged. Voter fraud is definitely one way, but that usually only works in relatively close elections. Needless to say, the corrupt Obama Department of Justice aids and abets this.

So if the election's close and Trump and his team discover the kind of voter fraud the Democrats are known for, they have every right to demand an investigation. And if the Establishment doesn't like that, tough. The ability to question election results where fraud is suspected shows the strength of our democracy and the rule of law, and if a Democrat had said this, we wouldn't be hearing word one about it.

Another thing worth mentioning is the media reaction to all this. Most of the media polls show Trump behind (although a number of them, even FOX have been caught using very small samples and oversampling Democrats to a ridiculous degree), and the meme is 'Trump's finished, it's going to be a Hillary landslide, game over.'

Now, according to the Media Trump lost the election weeks ago. Trump lost after the first debate. Trump lost after his tax return was stolen. Trump lost after being fired on by the GOP establishment. Trump lost after that secretly recorded locker room conversation was released. Yes, according to the Media, Trump lost the election a long time ago, right?

So why is the Media acting today like he's winning and just blew the whole thing with this 'shocking remark?' Because for that narrative to have any credibility at all, you'd have to believe they thought he was winning and trashed his chances with one statement they're deliberately misinterpreting.

Could it be that they know their polls are cooked and that selling the execrable Mrs. Clinton is a lot harder than they thought it would be? Could it be that Trump is doing a lot better than they want to admit and they're desperately using the weapon of trying to discourage turnout among Trump's supporters by doing their best to convince them that it's hopeless? If that's the case, then their constant refrain of Trump being finished makes sense.

Meanwhile Donald Trump doesn't seem to think he's finished at all! Does he know something the media isn't reporting? I recommend you invest a half hour and watch this:

He's exactly right that a campaign like Hillary's that will illegally pay thugs to incite violence at opposing political rallies will do anything to win. We'll see how successful they are come November 8th.

When It Comes to Jew Hatred, The Left Lives in Glass Houses

A friend of mine, no mean writer herself sent me some links from the likes of the New York Times and the New Yorker and flattered me by asking if I would write something about them. They could have been written by the same writer, had the same basic format and came out the same day as a number of other pieces by the usual suspects.

The topic? Sudden concern by the Left at the rise in anti-semitism caused by Donald Trump and carried on by his supporters on the alt-Right! Of course, they never had the intestinal fortitude to actually accuse Trump's campaign of anti-semitism, but both quoted one of their fellow Democrat leftists as saying that it was Trump who enabled it. The Times piece quoted Trump hater and Hillary supporter John Podhoretz as saying that “The best analogy I can give is that the campaign turned over a rock and a lot of stuff began crawling out from under it.”

“There were these code words and dog whistles that let it appear that people who had been doing things in the shadows could now start marching forward.”

The main focus was on the awful things people write on Twitter. Heaven forbid they would blame Twitter, which has a history of banning and shadow banning Republicans and conservatives like Milo Yiannopoulos and Professor Glenn Reynolds for far less! But Twitter, of course, is down for the agenda.

So, after I stopped laughing out loud at this nonsense, I started thinking...why get into this meme now, with the election only a few weeks away? After all, these folks have accused Trump of everything else. But before we go there, let's examine their central point, that Trump's campaign is what has unleashed Jew hatred....hint hint, nudge wink.

Jew haters always have a real disdain for candidates who have a history of being closely involved with Jewish causes, who openly embrace Israel as the true friend and ally of America it is, who have close Jewish associates of long standing, who have Jewish family members like a beloved daughter (especially if that daughter converted), a close son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren.

So if some Jew haters support Donald Trump, the reason can't be anti-semitism. And while it might be getting a pass by Twitter, it isn't getting a pass by Trump or his supporters. You can find a few of these Jew hating trolls (frequently they're Muslims, which we'll talk more about shortly) on plenty of threads in conservative media, but the reaction from the thread in a place like PJ Media or Breitbart is always to call them out and bombard them mercilessly. I've run into a few of them myself and after I dispose of them with a few facts and some well-honed ridicule, I always get a fair amount of up votes.

Yet there's one thing that can't can't be shrugged off. Jew hatred in America has definitely increased and it was noticeable long before Donald Trump ran for president. So what caused it?

Starting with the first Bush administration, we saw much closer and intertwined relationships with the Saudis and the Emirates and with the last Clinton administration and that of George W. Bush, those relationships got even closer. We saw these countries financing the Muslim Brotherhood and taking over America's mosques via the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), we saw increased Muslim migration from countries where misogyny and Jew hatred were quite common and the virtual purchasing of Middle East Studies departments and foreign policy chairs in our major universities. In 2008, President Barack Hussein Obama was elected and he increased these trends on steroids. For the first time, America had a a president with major ties to the Saudis, the anti-semitic Nation of Islam and a 'spiritual mentor' who preached Jew hatred and anti-semitism from the pulpit.

While President Obama managed to cleverly finesse these issues with the help of a compliant media and of course Jewish apologists on the Left, once the votes were cast he reverted to type, announcing that he wanted to create 'distance' between America and Israel,  attacking its policies at every turn, protecting and enabling Islamists in America,  and actually rewarding and recognizing anti-semites......even partying with them as his intimates.

By 2012, President Obama had made a fair amount of progress towards making Israel a partisan issue in American politics. Remember how Obama saw to it that all the pro-Israel language from the 2008 platform was eliminated? And what happened at the convention afterwards when it didn't poll well? And when at least half (and probably more) of the delegates on the floor refused to vote for changes to include some of the former language. Listen to the reaction when those changes were shoved through over the obvious wishes of the assembled delegates in spite of not getting the required two thirds majority after three futile tries:

Those people, by the way, are not Trump supporters of members of the so-called 'alt-Right.' They're Democrats. And notice back then that Obama, at election time, was once again fooling Jewish Democrats by saying that Jerusalem was the capitol of Israel. Once the votes were cast, he 'evolved' again. Apparently our president isn't sure which country he was in for the funeral of Shimon Peres.

The members of the White House supported and Soros funded #Black Lives Matter movement are also Democrats on the Left. And anti-semites, who have made it a litmus test for Jews wishing to be 'part of the progressive movement' to denounce Israel or become pariahs. Even some far Left 'progressive' Jews couldn't cross the line when BLM labeled Israel an 'apartheid state' committing 'genocide.'

The Jewish students being assaulted and intimidated on America's campuses aren't being attacked by members of the 'alt-Right.' They're being attacked by members of the Islamist Muslim Students Association (MSA), Students For Justice in Palestine and similar BDS groups...Leftists all.

Hillary Clinton isn't a Trump supporter either. But aside from having no problem with Jews bring denied access to their religious sites while Secretary of State, she was also happy to take the advice of her campaign guru John Podesta and her campaign manager Robbie Mook not to mention Israel at any of her events except appropriate fundraisers.

And if that isn't enough, Mrs. Clinton has pledged to carry on President Obama's policy and do something guaranteed not just to make things more dangerous for Jews and increase the attacks on them but to have the same effect on young women. She wants to increase the wholesale importation of unvetted Muslim men from the most anti-semitic and misogynist countries on earth, simply because she knows they'll vote Democrat to keep the benefits and welfare payments coming in.

This is exactly what has happened in Europe. Do a search on rapes in Germany, Sweden, France, sex grooming in the UK and similar topics as well as the rise of attacks on Jews in Europe to see how that would work out in America if Mrs. Clinton gets her way.

If you're a woman without rape fantasies, a Jew who wants to be able to walk around in relative safety or a homosexual, voting for Mrs. Clinton is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders or a trout voting to bring more fishermen to your lake.

And what do you know? Both the New York Times,The New Yorker and the other down for Hillery media support that agenda!

Which tells us where the real anti-semitism is coming from, doesn't it? And it's done with the active aiding and abetting of the Left. Could these stories be coming out now because team Clinton has an inkling that some people are starting to figure this out?

The pitiful and disgraceful attempt to libel the most philosemitic and pro-Israel ticket in years to cover for their own tacit endorsement of Jew hatred and the anti-semitic groups mentioned is beneath contempt.

When it comes to Jew hatred, the Left lives in very shoddy  glass houses. For them to throw any rocks at anyone else is the height of hypocrisy.

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Trending Now On WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

The UN Moves From 'Anti-Zionist' To Anti-Semitism

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)passed a resolution last week that nullified all Jewish and Christian ties and connections to the Western Wall (The Kotel) The Temple Mount, The Ma'Harat Machpelah (The Cave Of The Patriarchs, where Avraham and Sarah are buried) as well as Rachel's Tomb and other holy sites revered by Jews the world over for centuries.

The resolution not only erased any Judeo-Christian connection to these sites, but referred to them by their Muslim names, usually derived from the names of mosques that were built over them or near them centuries later during the brief Arab conquest. Here's how ridiculous this sounds:

This abomination also referred to all of East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria as 'occupied Jerusalem' and Israel as the 'occupying power.' It also 'deeply condemned' Israeli 'aggressions and illegal measures against the Awqaf Department and its personnel, and against the freedom of worship.'

'Aggressions?' 'Freedom of Worship?' You mean like this?

In spite of what the caption says, those stones are also used to target Jews worshiping below at the Kotel. This is how the Israelis are rewarded for doing something they had no imperative to do other than trying to seek peace by sharing these holy sites with the Muslims. So it's freedom of worship, all right. For Muslims and only Muslims.

Yes, believe it or not, after the massacres that drove the Jews out of Hebron, after the Arab attempt to commit genocide in 1948, after the 19 year occupation by Jordan that denied Jews any access to this holy place, one of the first thing the Israelis did was to attempt to share these shrines and the Cave of The Patriarchs shrine with the Muslim Arabs whom call themselves 'Palestinians', and who likewise claim Abraham as a father.

Israel's reward for this unbelievable generosity was repeated desecration of the shrine by the Arabs and of course, constant incidents of terrorism and murder, including the deliberate shooting by a PA sniper of 10-month-old Shalhevat Pas in her stroller.

UNESCO has along history of anti-Israel rulings and activities. After they crossed a final red line by breaking their own rules and allowing a non-existent country named 'Palestine' to join as a full member, the U.S.  and several other countries cut funding for the agency, which President Barack Hussein Obama restored after his 2012 re-election.

Voting in favor were: Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chad, China, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan and Vietnam.

Voting against were: Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States

Abstaining were: Albania, Argentina, Cameroon, El Salvador, France, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, India, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Nepal, Paraguay, Saint Vincent and Nevis, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Ukraine.

Absent were: Serbia and Turkmenistan.

Israelis on all sides of the political spectrum and yes, many non-Israeli Jews including (surprise, surprise) in America were outraged, even many of those on the Left.

So what does this mean in the real world

Even the head of UNESCO, Irina Bokova received death threats after publicly criticizing this resolution. As we know by now, that's how Islam plays the game. Not only doesn't Islam not play well with others, they want the others entirely out of the playground...or else.

Mexico's envoy to UNESCO, Andres Roemer who is Jewish was fired from his post over his reluctance to vote for this atrocity and his attempt to force a revote over Mexico's decision (along with Brazil) to change their yes vote to 'abstain.'

So, what does this mean in real life?

First, the Israelis not only aren't going to comply with this, but it underlines for them the futility of any kind of negotiated settlement. Area A of Judea and Samaria is entirely under Arab control and so is Gaza, without a single Jew being present in either place.And the Israelis have bent over backwards to be fair in allowing Muslim access to these sites. But if Israel is still being referred to as 'the occupying power' by the UN at this point, why should believe that any concessions they make are going to change that no matter how much land they give up? Why bother?

The truth is that the entire 'occupation' label is pure fiction because no such country as 'Palestine' ever existed and it had no sovereignty as a state over anything, not in 1922, not in 1948, not in 1967, never. No other country would be considered an occupying power in the circumstances except Israel, the Jew among nations. But if the notion of perpetual 'occupation' is so deeply ingrained that the UN continues to abuse it, why would Israelis expect it to ever disappear no matter how much land for 'peace' they give up?

So this is merely yet another attempt to try and legitimize this nonsense in what passes for 'international law' in certain quarters. At least in Turtle Bay.

Second, this is just a run up to a coming UN Security resolution regarding not just the erasing of Judeo-Christian ties to the holy sites but all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Those areas are now to be Judenrein and ceded to Islam and 'Palestine.'

In deference to President Obama and Secretary John Kerry who have been involved in the planning stages, this one will come after the 2016 elections no matter who wins, during Obama's lame duck period, a parting shot at Israel.

The United States voted against the UNESCO resolution because it's election time. But Obama will see to it that the US votes for or abstains from vetoing the second one, which will make the UNESCO one moot anyway. If Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem are to be ethnically cleansed of 500,000 Jews who have lived there for decades, Jews wont have any access to their holy sites anyway.

No sovereign nation would put up with this and Israel won't either. But it will legitimize the idea of Israeli 'occupation' and help to further distance Israel from the U.S. if Mrs. Clinton is the president.

Personally, if I were Netanyahu I would inform Secretary Kerry that if the United States abrogates Oslo and the Road Map in this way, Israel will no longer be bound by those agreements either and will feel free to resolve this situation unilaterally in a way of its own choosing.

In the end, that's what going to happen anyway. Facts on the ground will always trump the bigoted nonsense coming from the UN. Any ethical or moral authority it once had left a long time ago.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Forum: Is The Republican Party Finished?

Every week, the WoW! community 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 The Republican Party Finished?

 JoshuaPundit: Does anyone still doubt it? Here's the obituary:

They despise the majority of their own voters to the point they can't even support a nominee who got almost 50% of all the primary votes in a field of 17 candidates... to defeat Hillary Clinton!

Quiz time: How much money has the Republican National Committee donated to their Presidential nominees' campaign for ads this election? If you said zero, congrats! You win that made in China stuffed elephant.

They can be counted on to trash their own at the slightest opportunity. Let a Republican be accused, merely accused  of any wrongdoing or scandal in the media  and the Republicans can be counted on to lead the charge against them, especially on the media  no matter how contrived the evidence may be. Not only that, but they'll receive no penalty for that kind of disloyalty. The Democrats will stay alive because they do exactly the opposite. They circle the wagons around their own and send any Democrat who breaks with the pack into purgatory, as a warning to others.

They have zero understanding of how to exploit political power when they do get it, and are essentially self defeating. What other party would get record majorities in both houses of congress based on a tidal wave of loathing for Obama's agenda and do... wait for it...absolutely nothing but aid and abet that agenda? What other party but today's Republicans would suffer through four years of Democrat control of both houses where senate rules were broken repeatedly, including the nuclear option and refuse to use the same tactics in return, allowing Obama to put radical judges and appointees in power? What other party would fail to use the power of the purse to stop the wholesale importation of illegal migrants by executive order, something that will  be used undermine their majorities? What other party would allow a sitting president and his attorney general to laugh at them, break the law  and repeatedly ignore the Constitution?

There's more I could mention, but it's self evident that the GOP is dead. The rot started when Reagan left office and the Bushes took over the party, and is now in its final stages. Rather than an opposition party, they've become part of our Ruling Class, more interested in their own power and perks rather than the good of the country or the wishes of those who put them in office.

If Trump manages to get elected, he's going to be forced to use a lot of executive orders simply because the Republicans really wanted Mrs. Clinton and business as usual to win out and worked hard for it. They will fight him and impede him in a way they never fought or impeded Barack Obama, and with far less cause. He had better be prepared to build an entire new political party structure with the few remaining honest patriots in congress so the old order can be purged.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, that isn't going to save the GOP either. Not only will she destroy all but a remnant for comic villain purposes to be used at election time, but the millions of Americans inspired by Trump won't be coming back to the Republicans,ever. Lincoln's famous quote about the futility of trying to fool all of the people all of the time comes to mind.

Stately McDaniel Manor: Is the Republican Party finished? No political party lasts forever. However, as Ronald Reagan said, “The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this Earth is a government program.” The Democrat Party is a flimsily veiled criminal enterprise. An utter lack of morality, ethics, virtue and hatred for America and Americans are not disqualifiers for membership, but minimum qualifications. When Republicans are wounded on the field of battle, their leaders rush out not to help, but to bayonet them. When Democrats are in trouble, every Democrat closes around them, excuses, lies, fights, and does everything possible to protect them and each other. In that, the Democrats resemble an eternal government program. Republicans don’t.

Republicans know how to fight our enemies, and have the personal skills and corporate will to make our enemies fear us, and our allies trust us. Democrats know only how to attack and harm their fellow Americans, and embrace America’s most deadly enemies.

Political parties exist only as long as they have a coherent, easily understandable platform that meets the needs of its members and the nation. The contemporary Republican party now exists only for the benefit of it’s self-imagined elite rulers and their donors. Virtually the entire leadership of the party are Republicans in Name Only.

Out of power, they whined that they needed control of both houses of Congress before they could accomplish anything. We gave them that control and they accomplished virtually nothing. Having the power of the purse, the House of Representatives declined to use it. Facing Obama’s plot to make the Congress irrelevant, the Republicans slide complacently into irrelevancy with scarcely a whimper. Having the power to write laws, both houses did virtually nothing, whining that Mr. Obama had a veto. They allowed arrogant criminals heading federal agencies to insult and lie to them, and did nothing. Now they whine that without complete control of Congress and the White House, they can accomplish nothing. And with the prospect of a Trump presidency, they’re whining they won’t do anything he proposes. In fact, they’re sabotaging their own nominee, elected fairly by their own rules.

What, exactly, can Americans that honor the Constitution and believe in America go to see their beliefs furthered?

Around which principles can Republicans rally? When Republicans closely resemble Democrats, people will tend to vote for the real thing, rendering the Republican party a pale also ran. A Socialist Democrat Party must be opposed by a solidly conservative Republican Party. Anything less is far too weak to stand even the most tepid Media narratives. Far too many high-ranking Republicans have nothing but contempt for conservatives. The Republican Party is rapidly devolving into the Democrat Party of 30 years ago, while the Democrat long march through all of our institutions brings the glorious people’s revolution closer each day.

If, by some miracle, Donald Trump should take the White House, he’ll be fighting both parties. He may be able to get some Supreme Court nominees confirmed, and he may be able to get some of his proposals through the Congress, but he will never be able to enact the sweeping changes necessary to truly begin to reverse the horrific damage Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have wrought.

If Hillary Clinton wins, it’s all over. The Supreme Court will be lost for generations, and with it, the rule of law. America will lose even the pretense of borders, and a permanent Democrat voting majority will be established. Even if Republicans maintain majorities in the House and Senate, Hillary, like Obama, will have a veto, paralyzing them as they vote for more and more spending and debt, and as they allow Democrats to impose a single payer “health care” system on us all. This will, of course, require far higher taxes on the 47% that still pay income tax. Does anyone actually think Democrats will suddenly develop consciences, or will they turn the doling out of critical medical care into pay for play, which is their normal practice?

The Republican Party will continue into the foreseeable future, but it may never again be able to put anyone in the White House. Is the Republican Party finished? Perhaps the better question might be: is our Republic finished? If so, it will be contemporary Republicans leading the way to its destruction.

When they actually start coming for the guns--and they will--things are going to get very interesting, as in the ancient Chinese curse: “may you live in interesting times,” interesting.

Don Surber: The Party has never been stronger in Congress (not counting the Civil War) or at the state level. Prospects for keeping the Senate are pretty good despite the Herculean task of having to win 21 of 34 seats this year (20 if Trump wins).

But its failure to court its base imperils its future. There is a movement. Trump was the only one smart enough to join and wound up leading.

The status quo is dead. I hope.

The Glittering Eye : I'm not worried about the fate of the Republican Party. What history tells us is that political parties don't fail because they can't secure the White House.; They fail because they're just too darned much like the other party and there's no reason for them to continue to exist.

That's what happened to the Federalists. It's what happened to the Whigs. They became indistinguishable from the Democrats.

What's going on right now is the party ensuring its survival. The party establishment had become too much like the Democrats.

The real question now is what kind of party will it be? Right now it's too early to tell.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason :It appears the Republican Party as we have known it is finished. One thing the Tea Party accomplished was revealing the loss of conservative principles traditionally held within the party. Our attempts to actively participate within the Republican Party to restore conservatism and adherence to the foundational values of our constitutional republic have failed. The truth is neither party represents the American people any more. Progressives have infiltrated and corrupted both parties at every level. The parties are about power only, and we the people are being deceived into believing we have any say in the outcomes of elections or policies being implemented. We have permitted the rise of a ruling class in our country which must be reined in and eliminated.

Even if Donald Trump is elected president it is difficult to conceive of a revived Republican Party. He is not a fiscal or social conservative and does not represent constitutional conservatism. Hopefully a President Trump would stand strong on the Second Amendment and would appoint a more conservative justice or justices to the Supreme Court. But as for the Republican Party, I believe it no longer offers true conservatives any voice in how we are to be governed. We must form a new party and promote people to run for office who understand their role in governing as the founders intended, which is to represent and be the voice of the people who elected them, because #AmericaMatters.

Well, there it is.Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere. Take it from me, you won't want to miss it.