|
71
on: May 11, 2018, 06:06:57 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 5-10-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Slabinski previously earned the Navy Cross for his actions in the battle, but he will now become the 12th living service member to be awarded the Medal for actions in Afghanistan. He retired in 2014 after serving in the Navy for 25 years, including nine deployments overseas and 15 combat missions.
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55864-profiles-of-valor-us-navy-seal-britt-slabinski
Top Headlines9
White House rolls out agenda for more deregulation to boost business (The Daily Signal10)
Trump greets American detainees freed by North Korea (The Hill11)
Trump says will meet with North Korea’s Kim on June 12 in Singapore (Reuters12)
Israel strikes “nearly all” Iranian infrastructure in Syria after Iran rocket attack (Fox News13)
Iran violated nuclear deal, Bolton says (The Washington Free Beacon14)
McCain confirms he gave Trump dossier to Comey: “Duty demanded I do” it (Daily Beast15)
Border deployment leads to arrest of 1,600 more illegal immigrants (Washington Examiner16)
Half of all Americans now live in “sanctuaries” protecting illegal aliens (The Washington Times17)
Monica Lewinsky was disinvited from a “social change” event because Bill Clinton decided to attend (Hot Air18.)
California regulators want to add $10,500 to the price of a new home with a solar panel mandate (Reason19)
Policy: “Fair share” has limits, even in Seattle (City Journal20)
Policy: The Iran deal was betrayed by its own abysmal record (The Washington Post21)
For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report22.
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55884-thursday-top-headlines
FEATURED ANALYSIS
Making a Mockery of Legal Immigration23
Arnold Ahlert
Many things divide Americans. But most polarizing is the reality that some Americans, mostly conservative, believe in the Rule of Law. Other Americans, mostly progressive, also believe in the Rule of Law — but only if it aligns with their political agenda. Nothing reveals the divide better than the progressive effort to champion illegal immigration and an open-to-all asylum system, while virtually ignoring immigrants who play by the rules.
If a picture24 Keith Ellison, deputy chairman of the Democrat National Committee (DNC), taken during the May Day parade in Minneapolis doesn’t end up in ads run by every GOP politician running in November, Republicans are brain-dead. It features Ellison wearing a T-shirt with the words “Yo No Creo En Fronteras” emblazoned on the front.
Translation? “I do not believe in borders.”
In a sane nation, a prominent member of a national party advocating for the end of national sovereignty — and by extension, the Constitution itself — would be committing career suicide. In this one, Ellison is joined by the likes of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who was so incensed about a raid conducted by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in April that he sent25 the agency a “cease and desist” letter.
Cease and desist doing what? In a statement26 detailing the arrest of 225 illegals during a six-day period that month, ICE revealed that “more than 180 were convicted criminals or had criminal charges pending, more than 80 had been issued a final order of removal and failed to depart the United States or had been previously removed from the United States and returned illegally. Several had prior felony convictions for serious or violent offenses, such as child sex crimes, weapons charges, and assault, or had past convictions for significant or multiple misdemeanors.”
Cuomo’s response? The letter sent to acting ICE Director Thomas Homan stated that ICE agents “have become increasingly reckless and reflect a serious disregard for the rule of law.” Cuomo further asserted that if all illegal immigrants working on New York farms were arrested, it would engender a cut of more than $1.37 billion in the state’s agricultural industry production.
Amidst these contemptible machinations, genuine American values are being obscured. “America’s most forgotten men and women may be the legal immigrants who acquire their visas, scale no barriers, and patiently await their green cards and citizenship ceremonies,” writes27 columnist Deroy Murdock. “Amid the raging DACA debates, the fugitive-city outrages, and [the infamous] Honduran-caravan epic at the San Diego–Tijuana border, these overlooked individuals ring America’s doorbell rather than pry open the back entrance.”
Legal immigrants are not forgotten. They are marginalized by a Democrat-Media Complex that knows such people represent a mortal threat to The Narrative™ — a narrative that requires the deliberate conflation of “legal” and “illegal” immigrant, because absent the critical distinction, progressive assertions that Americans who disagree with their agenda are racist, bigoted, xenophobic and nativist ring exceedingly hollow.
Without that conflation, Americans would be constantly reminded of the stark difference between law-abiding and respectful people requesting entry and the activist-abetted, often lawless arrogance of those demanding it.
Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) senior researcher Nayla Rush, who legally emigrated from Lebanon and endured the costs and legal requirements associated with doing so, is taken aback by the attitude of the Central American caravaners — caravaners indoctrinated28 and enabled by the Pueblo Sin Fronteras (PSF) activist group. “I could comprehend someone wanting a better life, sneaking in, and, if caught, feeling apologetic,” she explains. “But these people are marching in front of cameras, in front of the whole world. They demand to be admitted here. Where does this sense of entitlement come from?”
It comes from several realities that make an utter mockery of legal immigration. “The DOJ had made it clear to caravan members that they would be arrested,” explains29 columnist Daniel Greenfield. “But because of the law, they can only be charged with a misdemeanor.”
Moreover, changes enacted by the U.S. Sentencing Commission during the last year of the Obama administration generally reduced30 the sentences for those illegally crossing the border after being previously deported.
Yet probably the most important piece of the entitlement mentality is driven by the bastardization of good intentions that initially precipitated the welcoming of refugees during World War II and the Cold War. The United Nations created the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol31 that defined the term “refugee,” outlined refugee rights, and illuminated the legal obligations of the world’s signatory nations to protect them. The U.S. became a signatory in 1968.
Yet as Greenfield further explains, policies initially aimed at helping those fleeing genuine oppression or catastrophe have been watered down to include an “economic migrant from a non-democratic country, a country suffering from natural disasters, a civil war or crime,” he writes.
The problem? “That’s most of the planet.”
Thus it should surprise no one that the Rule of Law, which requires a reasonable amount of timeliness to be effective, is the first casualty. The backlog of cases addressing the combination of illegals and “refugees” waiting to have their status adjudicated has exceeded32 one million, precipitating 684,000 delayed deportations. |
|
|
72
on: May 11, 2018, 06:05:54 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 5-10-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
The Patriot Post® · Mid-Day Digest
May 10, 2018 · https://patriotpost.us/digests/55885-mid-day-digest
IN TODAY’S EDITION
Democrat hypocrites attack Haspel for something they once approved.
A Navy SEAL will soon be awarded the Medal of Honor. And it’s controversial.
Leftists make an utter mockery of legal immigration.
The faith community won even more support from Trump.
NAACP chief thinks mandatory “implicit bias” testing is in order for all public officials.
Kicking conservatives out of medical and law school.
Plus our Daily Features: Top Headlines, Memes, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
THE FOUNDATION
“War, like most other things, is a science to be acquired and perfected by diligence, by perserverance, by time, and by practice.” —Alexander Hamilton (1787)
IN BRIEF
The Demo Hypocrites Blocking Haspel1
Senate Democrats, so blinded by their determination to resist President Donald Trump at every conceivable opportunity, can’t see that they are actually actively working against the very ideal of equality they so regularly espouse. But, honestly, should we expect any different?
Democrats’ latest obstructionist play is to stand against Trump’s nominee for CIA director, Gina Haspel, a 33-year career veteran of the agency. The Democrats’ objection2 is that Haspel worked at the agency during those days after the 9/11 terror attacks when the CIA employed “enhanced interrogation” techniques, specifically waterboarding, to extract information out of three prominent al-Qaida terrorist leaders. It was a practice members of both parties supported3 at the time. The objections to the practice came only years later, after the history and nature of the individuals and threats they presented had long since been forgotten, and when political advantage for Democrats took precedence over national security.
Meanwhile, The New York Times reports4 that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, pleaded to be able to speak at Haspel’s Senate hearing about his waterboarding experience. The Times writes, “Mr. Mohammed’s request to provide unspecified information to the panel adds a new twist to that debate. It was described by one of his lawyers, Marine Lt. Col. Derek A. Poteet, who is helping to defend him from death penalty charges before the military commissions system at the Guantanamo Bay naval station.” It should go without saying that this request should be denied.
Another interesting aspect to the Democrat resistance to Haspel is the fact that she would be the first woman to ever head the CIA. National Review’s Deroy Murdock pointedly calls out the Democrats’ hypocrisy, writing5, “One might expect that Senate Democrats, reputedly the vanguard of ‘the Party of Women,’ would help Haspel shatter the glass ceiling at the CIA, an historically male-dominated institution in an historically male-dominated profession. But Democrats are all too eager to lock arms and block this highly qualified and widely praised woman so that they can high-kick President Donald J. Trump in the teeth. So, high-kick the donkeys do. If that means that the first woman nominated to run the CIA never does so, then too bad for Gina.”
As things stand now, her confirmation hangs in the balance. Sen. John McCain, who was actually tortured in Vietnam as opposed to waterboarded (a distinction we believe is critically important), opposes her nomination, though he will be absent for the vote due to treatment for brain cancer. Sen. Rand Paul is also a “no,” while Joe Manchin is the only Democrat senator so far to voice his support. If any more Republicans defect, she may need at least one more Democrat to win confirmation.
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55861-the-demo-hypocrites-blocking-haspel
Profiles of Valor: U.S. Navy SEAL Britt Slabinski6
A retired U.S. Navy SEAL, Master Chief Special Warfare Operator (Sea, Air, and Land) Britt K. Slabinski, will receive the Medal of Honor on May 24 for “conspicuous gallantry” during a firefight in Afghanistan. Here’s how the White House describes7 Slabinski’s heroism:
As a Team Leader assigned to a Joint Task Force, in the early morning hours of 4 March 2002, then-Senior Chief Slabinski led a reconnaissance team to its assigned observation area on a snow covered, 10,000-foot mountaintop in support of a major coalition offensive [Operation Anaconda] against Al-Qaida forces in the valley below. Rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fired from enemy fighters hidden and entrenched in the tree lines and rocks riddled the team’s insertion helicopter. One teammate was ejected from the aircraft, and the crippled helicopter crash landed on the valley floor below. Then-Senior Chief Slabinski boldly rallied his remaining team and organized supporting assets for a daring assault back to the mountain peak in an attempt to rescue their stranded teammate. Later, after a second enemy-opposed insertion, then-Senior Chief Slabinski led his six-man joint team up a snow-covered hill, in a frontal assault against two bunkers under withering enemy fire from three directions. He repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire as he engaged in a pitched, close-quarters firefight against the tenacious and more heavily armed enemy forces. Proximity made air support impossible, and after several teammates became casualties, the situation became untenable.
Senior Chief Slabinski maneuvered his team to a more defensible position, directed air strikes in very close proximity to his team’s position, and requested reinforcements. As daylight approached, the accurate enemy mortar fire forced the team further down the sheer mountainside. Carrying a seriously wounded teammate down a sheer cliff face, he led an arduous trek across one kilometer of precipitous terrain, through waist-deep snow while continuing to call fire on the enemy who was engaging the team from the surrounding ridges. During the subsequent 14 hours, he stabilized casualties on his team and continued the fight against the enemy until the mountaintop was secured by the quick reaction force and his team was extracted.
The Battle of Takur Ghar was considered by the Defense Department as U.S. special operators’ most intense firefight since Mogadishu in 1993. Seven Americans were killed and 12 wounded, and U.S. forces lost two MH-47 Chinooks. One other American, Air Force Technical Sgt. John Chapman, will receive the Medal of Honor posthumously for actions during the battle. He will be the first Airman to receive it since Vietnam.
It’s Chapman’s story, however, that makes Slabinski’s Medal of Honor unusually controversial. The Navy argues that Chapman was already dead when the SEALs evacuated under Slabinski’s command. The Air Force insists the SEALs left Chapman alone on the mountainside to later die in the assault. Drone footage and autopsy results appear to corroborate8 the Air Force’s account.
Though the USAF does not assert that leaving Chapman behind was purposeful or anything less than the best the SEAL operators could do under terrible circumstances, some argue that Slabinski’s Medal is a SEAL effort to save face. At the same time, the Medal of Honor is the most strenuously vetted award, and, given that it’s been 16 years since the battle, it’s not easy to second-guess the decision to award Slabinski with the Medal given what he thought he knew during the battle. |
|
|
73
on: May 11, 2018, 08:03:49 AM
|
|
Started by Soldier4Christ - Last post by Soldier4Christ
|
|
God of All Graces
“Now the God of peace be with you all.” (Romans 15:33)
Our God of all the world has been known by many names in Scripture (Elohim, Jehovah, Adonai, etc.), but He is also identified, especially in the New Testament, as the God of many virtues and graces.
Our text calls Him, for example, the “God of peace.” The same appellation is given Him in Romans 16:20, Hebrews 13:20-21, and Philippians 4:9: “The God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly”; “now the God of peace . . . make you perfect in every good work to do his will”; “the God of peace shall be with you.”
He is even called the very God of peace who will “sanctify you wholly” in 1 Thessalonians 5:23. He is “the God of hope” in the beautiful invocation of Romans 15:13. “Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing.”
To the sorrowing, He is “the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort” (2 Corinthians 1:3). And, of course, He is the “God of love,” as Paul reminded the Corinthians in closing his last letter to them. “Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you” (2 Corinthians 13:11).
The apostle Peter wound up his first epistle by reminding his own readers that their God was “the God of all grace.” “The God of all grace, . . . make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you” (1 Peter 5:10).
In summary, our gracious God is the God of peace, the God of hope, the God of all comfort, the God of love, and the God of all grace. He is also “the Father of mercies” and “the Spirit of truth” (John 14:17; 15:26). And the Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, is of God, “made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption” (1 Corinthians 1:30). HMM
|
|
|
74
on: May 10, 2018, 08:51:49 AM
|
|
Started by Soldier4Christ - Last post by Soldier4Christ
|
|
The Father's Love for the Son
“And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17)
In this remarkable verse, God the Father, speaking from heaven itself, introduces His beloved Son to the world. This is the first New Testament reference to “love,” just as the Father’s love for the Son was the first love that ever existed. As Christ prayed in the upper room, “For thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).
There are many other references to the Father’s love for the Son, including two to the voice at His baptism (Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22) and two more in the upper room prayer (John 17:23, 26). One great reason for that love is the following: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life” (John 10:17).
The extent of the Father’s love for His blessed Son was all-encompassing. “The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand” (John 3:35). Furthermore, “the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth” (John 5:20).
God also spoke of His “beloved Son” on the Mount of Transfiguration, as cited four times (Matthew 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35; 2 Peter 1:17). Thus, there are seven references in the New Testament to the Father’s heavenly testimony to His beloved Son. Similarly, there are seven passages where the Son Himself testifies of that Fatherly love. In addition to the six cited above, Christ said, “As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you” (John 15:9).
Seven testimonies from the Father and seven from the Son! Surely the Father loved the Son with a perfect love. And yet—“Herein is love . . . that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10). Such love for unworthy sinners merits nothing less than total thanksgiving from us. HMM
|
|
|
75
on: May 09, 2018, 04:45:26 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
_______________________________________________
Two Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society
Free Email Subscription
For Questions Or Comments: berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________
A Good Job
by Pastor Cornelius R. Stam
As Loren stood with his father, gazing at a beautiful Minnesota lake, the little four-year-old asked: “Daddy, who made this lake?” “God made it,” replied his dad, “and God made those trees and all this beautiful scenery.”
There was a moment’s silence. Then, placing his hands on his hips, little Loren said: “He sure did a good job!”
Yes, He did, yet this scenery was nothing compared with the glory this earth will know when Christ returns to reign. If earth’s rivers and lakes, its mountains and valleys, its landscapes and seascapes can now be so breath-taking, so awe-inspiring, what will be its beauty when prophecy is fulfilled and the curse removed!
“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them [God’s people, Israel] and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.
“It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the Lord, and the excellency of our God.”
“…for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.
“And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water…”
“And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away” (Isa. 35:1,2,6,7,10). |
|
|
76
on: May 09, 2018, 04:44:13 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
_______________________________________________
Two Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society
Free Email Subscription
For Questions Or Comments: berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________
Romans 13 -- Civil Government or Church Government?
by Pastor Ricky Kurth
“Is Romans 13 about obeying civil government or church government, as some are saying?”
In the context, it is true that Paul just finished speaking about “he that ruleth” in the local church (12:8.). But the “rulers” in Chapter 13 bear a “sword” (v. 4) that cannot refer to “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) borne by church rulers, for he that bears it is called “a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (13:4). That doesn’t fit the role of rulers in a grace church, but it is an apt description of civil rulers. In the more immediate context, Paul has just finished quoting God as saying, “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay” (12:19). So when Paul then goes on to call the bearer of the sword “a revenger,” he is explaining that God takes vengeance on evil doers in the dispensation of grace by the sword of civil government.
In return for their civil service, we are told to pay these rulers “tribute,” something paid to kings (Matt. 17:24,25; 22:17), not rulers in grace churches. The Jews paid tribute to Israel’s religious leaders (Num. 31:37-41) because they were a theocracy, a government ruled by God, and so paying tribute was just giving God His due. But the word “due” (Rom. 13:7) speaks of what is owed as a debt, and so “tribute” is a word that cannot be used of giving in the local church. Under grace, our giving is not done “of necessity” (2 Cor. 9:7). |
|
|
77
on: May 09, 2018, 04:41:44 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
__________________________________________
From Grace Gems:
Very Old - But Beautiful and Timeless Treasures.
Everything is FREE and Public Domain.
http://www.gracegems.org/19/literature.htm
___________________________________________ He must take away our toys!
(Charles Naylor, "Providences and Circumstances")
Life is often an enigma. It brings to us many things that we cannot understand. How blessed it is at such times, to realize that there is One wiser than we, who has our lives in His care and who sees all and understands all! God is our Father, and we are the children of His love. He has our welfare at heart. He is interested in all that concerns us. He watches over all our lives, and nothing that comes to us can come without His wise appointment. Whatever comes, He knows full well its effect upon us, and His loving hand is ever ready to protect and help His children.
He could, if He chose, lead us in a pleasant and easy path through life--but He knows that a pleasant and easy path would not develop that strong and hardy Christian character which is so essential for us. Neither would it give Him an opportunity to reveal the riches of His grace, or His tender care.
He sometimes places a mountain of difficulty before us, that we may climb to higher altitudes--and that in the climbing, we may develop spiritual strength. Every difficulty that we conquer by God's grace, raises us higher in the Christian life. This is the purpose of these difficulties.
He sometimes sends sorrow to soften us and make us hungry for His comfort. We may become too satisfied with earthly things. We may draw too much of our joy from them. He delights to have us draw our joy and our comfort from Him; therefore He must take away our toys which have been occupying our time--that our souls may yearn for the comfort and blessedness which only He can give. He knows that nothing softens us like sorrow. So He gives us a cup of sorrow to drink to the dregs--and oh, what tenderness and blessedness come into our lives when we submissively drink of that cup, no matter how bitter it may be to our taste!
All these happenings may seem dark and mysterious to us; they may seem to be the very things that are the worst for us--but they are not. They are but the manifestations of His kindly wisdom and His fatherly tenderness. Sometimes behind a frowning providence, He hides a smiling face. We often see only the frown of the providence, and that frown looks very threatening; but if we will look away from that frowning providence to the smiling face of God, we shall see that which will uplift us and strengthen us and enable us to bear whatever stroke of providence may come.
He knows that we must taste the bitter, before we can appreciate the sweet.
He knows that we must feel life's sorrows, before we can value its joys.
Suffering more than anything else, develops us in the Christian graces. It is for this purpose that He sometimes leads us along difficult paths. Though His providences are often dark and mysterious--His love will never fail us.
But throughout our lives, if we are His, then we know that "God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." Romans 8:28. When difficulties arise through which we can see no way, and He makes a way of which we had never thought--it is then that our hearts are made to wonder at His wisdom and are melted with gratitude.
His ways are not our ways. They are higher and better than our ways. If we were wise enough, we would always choose for ourselves, that which He chooses for us. But alas! How often when we choose for ourselves, we choose that which is least wise and most hurtful!
O soul, trust Him. He knows the way that you take. He knows just what is needful for you. So bear with patience, and endure with meekness, and do not question His wisdom or love. This will make the hard places easier, and the tiresome places less tiresome. |
|
|
78
on: May 09, 2018, 04:40:24 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
__________________________________________
From Grace Gems:
Very Old - But Beautiful and Timeless Treasures.
Everything is FREE and Public Domain.
http://www.gracegems.org/19/literature.htm
___________________________________________ Much of the service of some so-called Christians
(Charles Naylor, "Acceptable Service")
"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in Heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full." Matthew 6:1, 2
Our service to God must be an unostentatious. Service which springs from true love to God--never desires to display itself. Genuine service is not done for the eyes of men to behold; it is done as a loving tribute to God, the object of its love.
The principle here set forth is that what is done with the purpose of being seen by men, brings only the reward that men give; in other words, it is not accepted by the Lord as service to Him. Judged by this rule, much of the service of some so-called Christians is never, I fear, recognized in Heaven at all. Our good deeds are to be done--not that men may see them--but that God, who sees in secret, may see, and reward according to His own will, and that He may regard them as service done to Himself and not for the reward of men's praise.
It is simple, single-hearted service which pleases the Lord.
The man who is truly godly, has no desire to put himself upon exhibition. He thinks, "Not I, but Christ!" and not only thinks it, but feels it in the depths of his heart.
"But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." Matthew 6:3-4 |
|
|
79
on: May 09, 2018, 04:38:02 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post - Alexander's Column 5-9-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
For 200 years, European-American immigrants and the generations that followed were united behind constitutional republicanism. But with the social and cultural entropy of the 1960s, that unity began to disintegrate. In recent decades, ethnocentric divisions have emerged, and, most notably, those divisions have become significant politically manufactured obstacles to the integration of immigrants coming to America.
In 1991, I acquired a copy of Arthur Schlesinger’s book, The Disuniting of America, now a benchmark classic on ethnocentric divisions. As a distinguished Harvard professor and former senior advisor to JFK, Schlesinger condemned the orthodoxy of self-interested hyphenated-Americanism — those who, rather than unifying to become one, were diversifying to become many. He warned that the cult of ethnicity would result in “the fragmentation and tribalization of America,” the natural consequence being that these special interest groups would be co-opted by the political parties.
“Instead of a transformative nation with an identity all its own,” Schlesinger prophetically wrote, “America increasingly sees itself in this new light as preservative of diverse alien identities — groups ineradicable in their ethnic character.” He asserted, by way of inquiry, “Will the melting pot give way to the Tower of Babel?”
At the time it was published, Schlesinger’s leftist colleagues ostracized him for daring to break ranks with the Democrats’ racial orthodoxy playbook17, their politics of disunity18 and their “divide and conquer” strategy.
Schlesinger boldly argued that a stress on ethnicity has benefits, but “its underlying philosophy is that the United States is not a nation of individuals at all but a nation of groups, that ethnicity is the defining experience for Americans.” This ethnocentric dogma, he warned, “replaces assimilation by fragmentation, integration by separatism. It belittles unum and glorifies pluribus.”
Schlesinger warned that the cult of ethnicity manifesting as subgroup ethnocentric identities would divide the nation, thus putting at risk the patriotic devotion that has bonded previous generations of immigrants into one nationality.
He noted that assimilation has always been the basis for our strong national foundation. He quoted from Jean de Crčvecoeur’s 1782 letter: “He is an American, who leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds… Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men.”
Today, almost three decades after “The Disuniting of America was published, ethnocentricity has become a centerpiece of Schlesinger’s once-noble Democrat Party19. Democrats have divided our nation into constituent identity groups based upon race, creed, gender, religion, ethnicity, wealth, ad infinitum. Of all those divisions, the highest percentage Demo voter bloc is racial — black voters. More than 90% of black voters have been duped into believing that Democrat race-bait political hustlers20, who promote ”black privilege21,“ actually think ”black lives matter22“ beyond being voter constituency pawns.
But the unbridled identity fragmentation today may also be the disuniting of the Democrat Party, as some of its strictly defined constituencies begin to dissociate from the traditional Demo-definitions. Leftist political analyst John Judis, who once endorsed identity politics in his book, The Emerging Democratic Majority, now writes, "The U.S. census makes a critical assumption that undermines its predictions of a majority-nonwhite country. It projects that the same percentage of people who currently identify themselves as ‘Latino’ or ‘Asian’ will continue to claim those identities in future generations. In reality, that’s highly unlikely.”
Whether Democrats’ divide-and-conquer strategy to disunite Americans will continue to succeed as it has in the past remains to be seen. But this accelerating identity disintegration that threatens the Democrat Party most assuredly threatens our nation.
George Washington1 warned, “We are either a United people, or we are not. If the former, let us, in all maters of general concern act as a nation, which have national objects to promote, and a national character to support. If we are not, let us no longer act a farce by pretending to it.”
The Democrat Party stopped pretending decades ago.
(Footnote: Ironically, the same racial orthodoxy crowd that strenuously objected to Dolezal’s efforts to pass as black are now insisting that rapper Kanye West23 is trying to pass himself off as white because he dared break racial ranks24 by not condemning Donald Trump25.)
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Pro Deo et Libertate — 1776 |
|
|
80
on: May 09, 2018, 04:37:01 PM
|
|
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post - Alexander's Column 5-9-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
The Patriot Post® · Devolution of the Demos' 'Identity Politics' Constituencies
By Mark Alexander · May 9, 2018 · https://patriotpost.us/alexander/55860-devolution-of-the-demos-identity-politics-constituencies
“The policy or advantage of [immigration] taking place in a body may be much questioned; for, by so doing, they retain the Language, habits and principles which they bring with them. Whereas by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures and laws: in a word, soon become one people.” —George Washington1 (1794)
Every day, my inbox is filled with a wide range of email — from the Communist Party USA on the Left to the John Birch Society on the Right. (I wade through all the leftist communiques so you, our Patriot readers, don’t have to.) The best way to understand the strategies and tactics used by the adversaries of Liberty2 and Rule of Law3 is to go straight to the source. And frankly, the political and policy positions of the CPUSA and the statist Democrat Party4 leadership today constitute a distinction without much difference.
In the evenings, I work my way through a queue of documentaries, which my wife sometimes tolerates but often enjoys. This week, one of those was a new Netflix release, “The Rachel Divide5” — the bizarre but fascinating story of Rachel Dolezal6.
Dolezal, as you may recall, is the award-winning black woman who formerly led the office of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in her hometown of Spokane, Washington. Dolezal also taught African-American studies at Eastern Washington University.
Problem is, Dolezal isn’t actually black. She was, and remains, a Caucasian woman, a Euro-American who shamelessly passed herself off7 as Afro-American for years, even rising to a very public position within the NAACP until a reporter called her out on the lie8.
After being outed, Dolezal adopted a popular leftist rationale for her delusion — that while she wasn’t actually black, she identified as black. You know, kind of like Sen. Elizabeth “Honest Injun” Warren (D-MA), who delusionally self-identifies as Native American9, insisting, “It’s part of who I am and no one’s ever going to take that away.” (Before being exposed, Warren had listed herself as a “minority” in law professor applications for her jobs at the University of Texas, University of Pennsylvania and Harvard.)
For the last two years, Dolezal’s “transracial” assertion that she “was biologically born white, but I identify as black” has stirred up a family feud in the “identity” movement arena.
On one side, her critics accuse her of committing “cultural appropriation10” — stealing cultural identity. On the other side, her defenders say that her black identity is authentic and should not be subject to biology.
Doreen St. Felix, an actual black woman, who reviewed the Dolezal documentary for The New Yorker, concluded that Netflix’s promotion of the film and Dolezal’s life as constituting a “microcosm for a larger conversation about race and identity” is an overstatement. Dolezal has been subject to a lot of well-deserved outrage by black folks who don’t appreciate the ruse. Both Democrats and their black constituency fear that Dolezal’s definition of racial identity is a threat to the “black community,” as it might dilute that constituency.
Of course, it’s understandable why there might be some confusion11 over the legitimacy of her identity issues. After all, leftists have insisted for years that “sexual identity” (gender dysphoria12) is completely legitimate regardless of biology. In other words, when politically expedient, identity trumps reality, but the law of unintended consequences is exposing some political problems on the horizon.
Unfortunately for Dolezal, unlike the LBGTQIA (ad nauseam) alphabet of sexuality, racial dysphorics don’t have the backing of the Democrat Party’s largest and most loyal voter bloc, single women13.
However, asserting that “sexual identity” has nothing to do with biology is as phony as Dolezal’s racial identity argument as well as an extraordinary example of leftist hypocrisy14.
Dolezal is now touring the country promoting her life story, In Full Color, which, despite national book tour appearances, has enjoyed abysmal sales. She has also changed her name to Nkechi Amare Diallo, meaning “Gift of God Beloved Bold,” perhaps because she is now identifying as African-Who-Knows-What.
But beyond the Dolezal delusion, the “identity politics” that Democrats began embracing 30 years ago have now devolved into fractious groups based on an absurd range of “self-identities.” The consequences of the “diversity15” movement have dire implications for the unity embodied in our nation’s original motto, “E pluribus unum16.” (This motto, originally a reference to unity of the states during the American Revolution, is now commonly used to reference unity of diverse peoples making up the once-great melting pot of American citizens.)
As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes, “The Roman Empire worked as long as Iberians, Greeks, Jews, Gauls and myriad other African, Asian and European communities spoke Latin, cherished habeas corpus and saw being Roman as preferable to identifying with their own particular tribe. … For some reason, contemporary America believes that it can reject its uniquely successful melting pot to embrace a historically dangerous and discredited salad-bowl separatism. … Given our racial fixations, we may soon have to undergo computer scans of our skin colors to rank competing claims of grievance.” |
|
|
