|
Title: The Patriot Post Digest 4-5-2016 Post by: nChrist on April 05, 2016, 07:37:47 PM ________________________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 4-5-2016 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://patriotpost.us/subscription/new) ________________________________________ Mid-Day Digest Apr. 5, 2016 THE FOUNDATION “The present Constitution is the standard to which we are to cling. Under its banners, bona fide must we combat our political foes — rejecting all changes but through the channel itself provides for amendments.” —Alexander Hamilton (1802) TOP RIGHT HOOKS Did Ginsburg Just Channel Scalia?1 Hello, gerrymandering. For years, the powers that drew up congressional district maps used prisons and non-voting populations (think illegal immigrants) as filler to give certain voting populations more clout in elections. In a ruling this week, the Supreme Court upheld that practice in an 8-0 decision, saying legislative districts must be drawn up according to how many people live there, not the number of eligible voters. Two residents from Texas tried to persuade the courts that the power of their vote was diluted2 thanks to the practice, which they argued runs contrary to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. But in writing the opinion for the High Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg — who’s no originalist — reached way back to the founding of the nation, quoted Alexander Hamilton, and used history to make the Court’s case. Ginsburg wrote, “We hold, based on constitutional history, this court’s decisions, and long-standing practice, that a state may draw its legislative districts based on total population.” She added that back in 1789, the whole population was used to determine House seats, despite women not being able to vote and slaves counting as three-fifths of a person. In his own concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas added3 that jurisprudence in the issue of one-person, one-vote is not clear-cut. “The Constitution lacks a single, comprehensive theory of representation,” Thomas wrote. “It instead leaves States significant leeway in apportioning their own districts to equalize total population, to equalize eligible voters, or to promote any other principle consistent with a republican form of government.” The ruling is somewhat of a loss for conservatives, but on perhaps the best possible grounds. So when it comes to Ginsburg, why doesn’t she apply the same originalist standard to every other case? What the Leak of the Panama Papers Means4 To truly understand an organization or root out corruption, follow the money, the adage goes. Over the weekend, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) unleashed the largest data leak in human history. Dubbed the Panama Papers, the leak details how the rich, famous and powerful hide wealth in offshore accounts. One can hope it will allow the public to truly understand hundreds of organizations and root out corruption. The amount of data is huge5. The diplomatic cables that were released by WikiLeaks in 2010 were 1.7 gigabytes of information. The Panama Papers, on the other hand, comprise 2.6 terabytes and it took more than 370 investigative journalists from around the world months to sift through. To be clear: In most cases, it’s not a crime to set up a shell company in places like Panama or the Virgin Islands. But this is often just a form of tax evasion. As Investor’s Business Daily writes6, “It’s increasingly clear that the global elites in politics, business and sports have two sets of rules — one for them, and one for the rest of us.” There are 143 politicians caught up in the data leak, including Russian President Vladimir Putin. Using people close to him, Putin has been able to stash $2 billion overseas. Another politician, Petro Poroshenko, who won Ukraine’s presidency, promised7 to divest himself from his assets in the television and chocolate industries. However, Poroshenko merely hid those assets offshore. These are not just examples of the rich being rich. Thanks to money hidden offshore, people got hurt. People died. For example, according to a video8 produced by ICIJ, offshore money has been used to fuel Bashar al Assad’s campaign to bomb Syria’s civilian population. It has funded drug trafficking, bribery and sex trafficking of teenage girls. As Quartz editor Bobby Ghosh tweeted9, “Can we just remind ourselves that the #PanamaPapers are from just ONE law firm, in just ONE tax haven. Tip of the proverbial iceberg.” Part of the industry operating under the cover of darkness just had a huge spotlight lit upon it. Rats will scatter. So Much for Putin’s ‘Withdrawal’ From Syria10 A few weeks ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared mission accomplished11 in Syria, announcing the withdrawal of most military from that country. But you can never really trust what the Kremlin says. According to Fox News12, “There is more evidence that Russian forces are not pulling out of Syria, but instead, more troops are arriving there, a new video from Russian television Saturday apparently shows. The video shows a convoy of Russian troops headed to Palmyra to begin mine clearance operations after ISIS was routed from there [last] week.” This is a familiar pattern. Fox adds, “Critics point to a similar pledge from President Putin when Russian agreed to a ceasefire and to withdrawal troops and equipment out of eastern Ukraine in 2014. The outgoing U.S. commander of NATO forces in Europe recently said Russian troops and equipment remain. Despite sending less than half of its jet fighters back to Russia, there are now more Russian attack helicopters in Syria than at any time since the air campaign to shore up Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in late September.” As one anonymous American defense official put it, “The Russians installed underground fuel tanks in their airbase in Latakia. This was not a temporary move, but a permanent one.” Putin’s ultimate goal in Ukraine was not revenge, but supremacy. Similarly, we shouldn’t expect him to just up and leave Syria without some sort of contingency plan. He’s got something up his sleeve, which is why he got involved in the first place. The question is: What exactly? If Barack Obama’s foolish “red line” hadn’t moved so much, we wouldn’t now be waiting to find out. As historian Michael Ledeen opines13, “Putin knows time is running out on The Wonderful Thing That Happened in Washington (aka the Obama administration). So whatever he wants to get, now is the time. Maybe he’s got plans for those bombers.” Time will tell, but one thing is clear: Obama’s weakness has invited worldwide chaos. Don’t Miss Patriot Humor Check out Socialism14. If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here15. BEST OF RIGHT OPINION Hans von Spakovsky & Cole Wintheiser: 16 Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change Disbelievers’16 Stephen Moore: Why Do Liberals Hate America?17 Cal Thomas: Can’t We Do Better?18 For more, visit Right Opinion19. FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS Obama’s Defense Policies Jeopardize America20 By Paul Albaugh Looking back over the course of American history, one of the reasons that our nation rose to superpower power status was because of its strong defense policy. For most American presidents and those within their administrations, having a strong military along with foreign policies that allowed our nation to reach strategic and military objectives was the key to defeating our enemies and holding at bay geopolitical foes. Pretty simple. The world in which we live today is much more complex. Non-state actors who carry out acts of terrorism, state sponsors of terrorism, rogue nations, old enemies who have become emboldened by their ability to capitalize on vulnerabilities and many other threats are of concern to American citizens and our allies throughout the world. These realities did not have to come to pass, but they have, leaving many wondering if our nation is capable or ready for the next conflict or catastrophic event. We have noted on numerous occasions that when Barack Obama ran for president, he stated that one of his goals was to “fundamentally transform” America. When he took office, he also promised to be a new type of commander in chief, primarily by cutting and running from military engagements. It was obvious to us that he would be a poor leader, but after more than seven years of his feckless “leadership,” it should be glaringly obvious to everyone that this is not at all what our nation or our world needs. For starters, Obama recklessly promised to end (not win) the war in Iraq. Soon after our troops were withdrawn, the Islamic State, which is arguably one of the most brutal and relentless terrorist groups in history, rushed in to fill the vacuum Obama created21. Obama’s response to this terrorist threat was to nickname them the JV team, conduct limited airstrikes and continually promise that there would be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq. But today, there are 5,000 boots on the ground22, and Marine Staff Sergeant Louis F. Cardin became the first casualty several weeks ago. Title: The Patriot Post Digest 4-5-2016 Post by: nChrist on April 05, 2016, 07:38:56 PM ________________________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 4-5-2016 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://patriotpost.us/subscription/new) ________________________________________ Meanwhile, Obama has pushed for drastic social changes23 in the military, calling for “social justice,” equality and a more diverse fighting force. These were his priorities, despite the findings of numerous tests, studies and recommendations from high ranking officers. Common sense, the lessons of history, military logic, training and readiness were put aside for the sake of political correctness, a personal agenda and a sick version of social engineering. Under Obama, our Navy has been reduced to the smallest it has ever been since 1917. What was once known as the “Great White Fleet” can now be called the great green fleet24. That’s right, instead of bolstering our Navy to be a formidable force against evil, this administration has focused on using alternative fuel to fight temperature. Can anyone fathom what our real enemies think about this insanity? The answer is in the news headlines every day. In a special report titled “Rising Threats, Shrinking Military,” Fox News anchor Bret Baier investigates the phenomenon25 that is the Obama military. The report highlights the crux of Obama’s plan: “One of the signs of the president’s new approach is his deep budget cuts. Numerous defense programs have been scrapped, and the troops are being cut back — the Army’s active force threatens to drop below pre-World War II levels. As former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tells Fox News, after he worked hard to cut hundreds of billions from the Obama military budget, he was then told to cut hundreds of billions more. Gates fears less money today will mean more American blood later.” Gates rightfully states that he “felt double-crossed” by Obama on budgets and that because of these cuts, the U.S will be left more vulnerable than ever before in this era of non-state terrorism. How so? Gates says Obama initially told him that there wouldn’t be any significant changes in the defense budget for a while, yet the request for billions of dollars in cuts came not once but twice. Asked whether Obama kept his word, Gates replied, “Well, I think that began to fray. ‘Fray’ may be too gentle of a word.” In Gates' book, he also revealed26 that the Obama administration was unable to craft a coherent military strategy in Libya. White House staffers would often discuss military options without Defense being involved, so Gates instructed the Pentagon to avoid feeding too much information to the White House on Libya. “They don’t understand it,” he said, “and ‘experts’ like Samantha Power will decide when we should move militarily.” In addition to Gates, Baier also interviewed retired Gen. Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Flynn minced no words: “Frankly, the United States of America is in a less strong position today because of the readiness and the size of our Armed Forces.” Perhaps most important, he further notes, “I think [Obama] sees the military actually as something that is more dangerous to the world. I think that he looks at the United States military and sees it as a threatening application around the world, than actually as a useful tool.” It is absolutely tragic that our nation and the balance of power throughout the world has been jeopardized by the failed presidency of Barack Obama. It is a disgrace for the men and women who have volunteered to serve this country in uniform to have to endure the consequences that have and will result from Obama’s notion that somehow the world will be a better place by making our military weaker instead of stronger. It is a disservice to those who serve to drastically cut their budgets, reduce manpower and readiness, and waste valuable assets on fighting climate and integrating homosexuals instead of countering threats to national security. The world is not safer, and we as nation are not stronger. The next commander in chief will be faced with enormous challenges and calamities directly resulting from Obama’s failed policies. But rather than simply blame Obama, the next president needs to be ready to rebuild our military, to renew our strength as a nation and resolve to uphold the Constitution and defend our nation against all enemies. MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS: Minimum Wage Benefits Pandering Pols27 Spies Pushed Out of CENTCOM for Being Contrarian28 Government Has the Power to Break Into Apple Products29 Florida Reforms Its Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws30 MLK’s Dream Overshadowed by Record Murders31 Greece Returns Migrants, but Problems Persist32 TOP HEADLINES U.S. Seizes Thousands of Iranian Weapons in Arabian Sea33 Eleven Straight Record-Setting Months for Gun Sales34 Feds Tell Landlords They Can’t Refuse to House Criminals35 For more, visit Patriot Headline Report36 OPINION IN BRIEF Hans von Spakovsky & Cole Wintheiser: “A group of state attorneys general have announced that they will be targeting any companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change religion. Speaking at a press conference on March 29, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said, ‘The bottom line is simple: Climate change is real.’ He went on to say that if companies are committing fraud by ‘lying’ about the dangers of climate change, they will ‘pursue them to the fullest extent of the law.’ The coalition of 17 inquisitors are calling themselves ‘AGs United for Clean Power.’ … When pressed on the effect such investigations and prosecutions will have on free speech, General Schneiderman claimed that climate change dissenters are committing ‘fraud’ and are not protected by the First Amendment. … Although the Spanish Inquisition ended almost 200 years ago, the American Climate Change Inquisition appears to be just getting started. By threatening legal action and huge fines against anyone who declines to believe their climate theories, the attorneys general in this coalition are trying to end the debate over climate change, declaring any dissent to be blasphemy regardless of what many scientists believe. This strikes a serious blow against the free flow of ideas and the vigorous debate over scientific issues that is a hallmark of an advanced, technological society like ours.” SHORT CUTS Insight: “Taxes on capital, taxes on labor, inflation, bureaucratic regulation, minimum wage laws, are all — to different degrees — unnecessary slices of the wedge that stand between an individual’s effort and reward for that effort.” —Jack Kemp (1935-2009) For the record: “Some Trump supporters are talking as if a failure to change the rules for the benefit of ‘the Donald’ — by letting a plurality, rather than a majority, choose the winner — would mean that Trump had been cheated out of the nomination. But what of the voters who voted AGAINST Trump during the primaries? Despite the fog of political rhetoric, we should not lose sight of the fact that those who voted against Trump in the primaries were far more numerous than those who voted for him.” —Thomas Sowell Trumped: “I think it’s very clear to him that he cannot control the editorial on my show, or from me, in a debate or other setting.” —Fox News' Megyn Kelly on why Trump attacks her (An interesting indictment of Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly.) That’s the problem: “Somebody said, ‘Well, there’s a rule and another rule.’ I don’t care about rules, folks.” —Donald Trump Non Compos Mentis: “Everybody believes that we are weak; we are weak on the world stage; we are not doing things that make sense economically. And [Trump is] probably the person who is most likely to do that. Are there better people? Probably.” —Ben Carson, perhaps the worst surrogate ever Empty boasts: “We’ve been leading a global effort to secure the world’s nuclear materials. And with summits like this37, we’ve made important progress. Working with other nations, we have removed or secured enough nuclear material for more than 150 nuclear weapons — material that will now never fall into the hands of terrorists. All of South America is now free of these deadly materials. Central Europe and Southeast Asia are on track to be free of them later this year.” —Barack Obama (As for Iran, well…) Late-night humor: “Tesla unveiled its new model 3 electric car. And I saw that fans were camping outside Tesla stores to reserve one. Camping out is actually great practice for when their cars run out of power 30 miles from the nearest outlets.” —Jimmy Fallon Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis! Managing Editor Nate Jackson Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. |