The Patriot Post Digest 11-16-2016

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-16-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

Nov. 16, 2016

IN TODAY’S EDITION

House GOP faces tests — they unanimously backed Ryan, but are considering earmarks.
Obama thinks he did a “good job,” but he travels to Europe to bash America again.
Pro-abortion celebrities taunt Pence rather than argue their case.
About that FBI “hate crimes” report…
And more news, policy and opinion.

THE FOUNDATION

“The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.” —James Madison (1788.)

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

GOP House: The Good and the Bad1

Some change is good and some not so good, but the concept of change simply for the sake of change is often a recipe for disaster. Yesterday, House Republicans unanimously voted to keep Paul Ryan (R-WI) as speaker of the House. While it’s clear not every Republican is a fan of Ryan and he probably won’t get unanimous support for the upcoming speaker election, this display of party unity is significant. It strengthens the party for the inevitable policy opposition and battles it is sure to face from Democrats and the Leftmedia. This also bodes well for Donald Trump’s policy plans since both Reince Priebus and Mike Pence are good friends of Ryan — having the three work together to craft policy should encourage conservatives.

Unfortunately, the bad news is that several House Republicans — Reps. John Culberson of Texas, Mike Rogers of Alabama, and Tom Rooney of Florida — are seeking to revive earmarks, a practice the GOP disallowed upon retaking the House in 2010. Earmarks have been associated with causing corruption in Washington. It’s this type of government cronyism, which caters to special interest groups, that Trump specifically identified as needing to be cleaned up. And for all his faults, former House Speaker John Boehner detested earmarks and defended the ban.

Andy Koenig, vice president of policy at Freedom Partners, said, “Hard working Americans want their tax dollars spent wisely and transparently.” Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin warned, “Any member of Congress who votes to bring back old-school, backroom, pork barrel spending through earmarks is putting himself or herself firmly against the American people who just elected Donald Trump president, as he campaigned emphatically on the issue of draining the swamp in Washington.” And Ken Cuccinelli, president of Senate Conservatives, argued, “Americans are tired of politicians in Washington using their power to rig the system for special interests. … It would be a major mistake for Republicans to bring back earmarks as their first act after the elections. It would be a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who just voted to drain the swamp.” The House is voting today via secret ballot. Let’s hope this proposal is defeated.

Obama’s Denial Tour2

Among the first things Barack Obama did upon assuming office in 2009 was to embark on his infamous apology tour, visiting various world leaders to express his heartfelt sorrow for America’s failings. Now on his last foreign trip, billed as an attempt to reassure allies3 after Donald Trump’s election, Obama has revived his apologize-for-America rhetoric, while at the same time attempting to defend his own record. It’s as if Obama were saying to his leftist, globalist, elitist buddies, “It’s hard work attempting to rule those obstinate and ignorant rubes4.”

In Greece, Obama declared, “We have to deal with people’s fears that their children won’t do as well as they have. The more aggressively and effectively we deal with those issues, the less those fears may channel themselves into counterproductive approaches that pit people against each other. And frankly, that’s been my agenda for the last eight years.” What a completely disingenuous statement given Obama’s incessant practice of “pitting people against each other.” Obama, the divider in chief, rarely let an opportunity go by to blame some group — whether it be the “gun lobby” or “racist cops” or those “do-nothing” Republicans or, his seemingly favorite target whenever referencing the poor economy or the problems in the Middle East, George W. Bush.

While seeking to protect his legacy and continue to promote his ideal of globalism, Obama also sought to warn the world against populist movements. He cautioned that people around the world “are going to have to guard against a rise in a crude sort of nationalism, or ethnic identity, or tribalism.” This too is ironic, as it was his administration that endlessly practiced identity politics based entirely on tribalism.

In one of Obama’s more narcissistic moments, he attempted to explain why Americans seem to like him but rejected so much of what he accomplished. He boasted, “People seem to think I did a pretty good job, and so there is this mismatch I think between frustration and anger. Perhaps the view of the American people is that you just need to shake things up.” In other words, he wasn’t the problem; Americans just don’t know what’s good for them. Maybe he forgot that he spent the entire campaign running around telling anyone who would listen that he wasn’t on the ballot but his policies were. Americans do know one thing: We don’t much like those in government dictating to us what we’re allowed to think and speak.

Pro-Abortion Celebs Taunt Pence5

In today’s celebrity-obsessed culture, people often get caught up supporting particular causes based not upon well-reasoned and principled arguments but rather upon emotionally alluring appeals from self-proclaimed social justice warrior celebrities. Sadly, this type of manipulation produces a crowd of foolish lemmings motivated by a desire for acceptance into the “right group” or being on the “right side of history” rather than by the cause of “justice.”

Katy Perry, Amy Schumer, Amber Rose and several other celebrities have started a drive on social media to encourage people to donate to Planned Parenthood in the name of Vice President-elect Mike Pence. Why in Pence’s name? Well, rather than attempting to promote the “justice” of their cause — that of supporting the nation’s largest provider of abortions — they have deemed it more beneficial to mock and disparage those who would stand opposed to their vile agenda.

Pence has a long history of defending the rights of the unborn against those who espouse as supreme the rights of sexual liberation and personal convenience. Since those who are pro-abortion are finding it increasingly difficult to argue against the charge that abortion does indeed destroy a human life, they have often pivoted and attacked the messenger rather than the message.

It would be more accurate if Perry, Schumer and Rose said they want you to donate to Planned Parenthood because the lives of kids don’t matter until they’re born. But they’ll never make an honest argument. And sadly, many will jump on board simply because it’s what Katy, Amy and Amber want.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Terence Jeffrey: Winning Coalition: Married, Mature, Church-Going, Self-Sufficient6
Michelle Malkin: The Slacker Mandate and the Safety Pin Generation7
Jonah Goldberg: Obsession With Race Is Stretching Beyond Reason8
Ben Shapiro: America’s Celebrity Class Versus Flyover Country9

For more, visit Right Opinion10.

TOP HEADLINES

Obama Twists the Knife in Clinton’s Disastrous Campaign11
Dems Delay Vote on Picking Leaders12
Colombia Inks Another Deal With Communist Rebels13

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report14.

What Are You Doing For Liberty?

Sometimes readers ask us: What good will a donation to The Patriot Post do in the fight for Liberty?

Good question.

The answer is that we’re a leading advocate of Liberty and limited government through our hard-hitting daily news analysis. By covering the latest headline stories from a constitutional perspective, we provide grassroots Patriots with a resource that can’t be found in the mainstream media. Arming conservatives with the Right perspective is essential in combatting the Left’s relentless assault on the Rule of Law.

But we need your financial support to keep that coming. Because there isn’t a special interest or parent organization financially backing us, we rely on our readers, many of whom donate in the $26 range. Our voice is your voice — make it heard with a secure online donation today15.

Thank you for standing with us! —Nate Jackson, Managing Editor

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Hate Crime Hysteria Is Way Off Base16

By Louis DeBroux

Fresh off the election of Donald Trump, the nation was greeted by news of the stunning rise in “hate crimes,” as detailed in the FBI’s latest iteration of its Hate Crimes Statistics report. At first blush, it offers frightening prospects for the safety of various minority groups across America. At second blush, not so much.

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-16-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

New York Magazine writer Eric Levitz breathlessly begins his article, “Hate Crimes Against Muslims Increased by 67 Percent Last Year,”17 with the angst-ridden declaration that these crimes had reached “their highest levels since the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, according to FBI data released on Monday.”

From the fainting couch, he continued, “In 2015, there were 257 reported crimes rooted in anti-Muslim bias, up from 154 incidents the previous year. Notably, this uptick coincided with a GOP presidential primary in which a candidate who decried the Justice Department’s concern with violent, anti-Muslim rhetoric finished second to one who proposed banning all Muslims from the country.”

As usual, the devil is in the details, so let’s point out a few that drastically change the narrative.

For example, the FBI analyzes incidents reported in 2015, but it wasn’t until late in the year that Trump’s candidacy really took off, so one would be hard pressed to explain why the increase could be attributable to Trump. Other factors are far more plausible, including the series of deadly Islamic terror attacks (Paris and San Bernardino among the targets), or the contention fomented by Barack Obama’s attempt (with the help of the Rainbow Mafia) to force Americans to allow grown men to share bathrooms with women and little girls, or violent protests led by Black Lives Matter thugs. Is it possible that maybe, like Newton’s Third Law of Motion, these actions triggered opposite reactions?

Another critical point to understand is that the number of these incidents is incredibly small, and the threshold by which an action qualifies as a “hate crime” is ludicrously low.

Of all hate crimes reported in 2015, two-thirds did not involve any form of physical violence18. And of those that did, nearly 70% involved only simple assault, which the FBI defines as an incident where no weapon is used and no serious injury occurred. This category of crime includes intimidation (including verbal threats or name-calling), which accounted for 41% of all “assaults.” And considering how many privileged, weak-spined snowflakes roam America — grown adults reduced to sobbing19 when their “safe space” has been violated by the presence of “offensive” Halloween costumes — this number should be taken with a truckload of salt.

Simple assaults, including slapping, shoving, or spitting on, accounted for 39% of “hate crimes.” In other words, only a small fraction of hate crimes — the kind that spring to mind when we hear the phrase, like aggravated assault (18.7%), rape and murder (well under 1% each) — actually include significant physical violence.

Keep all this in mind as you read back over that headline of a 67% increase in hate crimes against Muslims. The total number of reported “hate crimes” against Muslims in 2015 was 257, and using the aforementioned percentages as a guide, that means that 51 Muslims were seriously assaulted in 2015, out of a total American Muslim population of roughly 3.3 million. So one out of every 64,706 Muslims suffered physical violence as a result of a hate crime in 2015, and one out of every 1,079,823 blacks. In fact, there were almost as many black-on-black murders in the city of Chicago in 2015 as there were total “hate crimes” against blacks in the entire United States the same year. Again, assuming these crimes were specifically motivated by hateful bigotry.

It should go without saying that unprovoked attacks against ANY individual, regardless of race, sex, religion, or any other factor, are completely unacceptable. At the same time, it is dishonest to portray America as a place where blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, homosexuals, transgenders, and women are living in constant fear of attack. That’s the narrative Democrats like Harry Reid despicably advance20, though.

Another thing to consider is that these numbers are based on crimes reported to law enforcement authorities. Yet when there are numerous examples of hate crime hoaxes being perpetrated — like the Muslim woman claiming she was beaten by white male Trump supporters21 as they screamed racial slurs, who now admits she made it all up — even the reported numbers become suspect.

Oh, and by the way, Jews are more likely to be the victims of hate crimes than Muslims. But that doesn’t fit the narrative. Not when even criticizing Islam is a “hate crime”22 to some people.

The bottom line is that each and every violent criminal deserves to be prosecuted and jailed, and no decent, honest American should ever be subjected to this kind of abuse. But categorizing name-calling and being offended as “hate crimes,” or lying about these kinds of attacks, makes it harder for true victims to be believed and protected, and it instills in some of us an unjustified fear of fellow Americans, whom some erroneously believe to hate them. This serves no one except those who profit from social, racial and political discord.

MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

The Climate Could Change on the Paris Agreement23 — Because Obama avoided making it a treaty, Trump could undo the damage.
What Should Trump Do About Iran?24 — Form a coherent policy. Then decide what to do about the nuclear deal.
Ecofascists Clog Another Pipeline25 — The Army Corps backtracks on Dakota Access Pipeline.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Terence Jeffrey: “When voters practice their faith, it hurts the liberal cause. Now, imagine an unmarried 22-year-old, who lives in a city, works part-time making $20,000 per year, and has not gone to a religious service in four years. How would that person be likely to vote? Suppose, then, this same person gets married, starts working full-time and overtime, earns more than $50,000 per year, buys a home in the suburbs, and regularly attends religious services with the spouse and children. How would this person be likely to vote then? But what if this person followed another path? They married and then divorced, decided it was not worth it working full-time, went on food stamps and never went to church. The ultimate question is not how a person will vote, but what will give them a fulfilling life. It is not what persons will hold political office in United States of America, but what values will keep us free and prosperous. The same values that made this nation great can unite this nation again. They are family, faith, hard work and the desire to live a long and good life without government standing in your way.”

SHORT CUTS

Upright: “Appropriately enough, the new virtue signals of tantrum-throwing young leftists stirring up trouble are safety pins — to show ‘solidarity’ with groups supposedly endangered by Donald Trump. Safety pins are also handy — for holding up the government-manufactured diapers in which too many overgrown dependents are swaddled.” —Michelle Malkin

For the record, part I: “Here’s some free advice for all the liberals insisting that Trump was elected by racists: The more you say that, the more you help Trump.” —Jonah Goldberg

For the record, part II: “The day after the election, you responded by literally sitting on the ground and crying. … This is not what adulthood looks like.” —recent Cornell grad Megan Tubb in a letter to Cornell students

Race bait: “We are fighting the last big major battle of the Civil War. There’s only been two times in the history of America where, upon the election of a president, the people en masse took to the streets. One was Abraham Lincoln, and the other was Donald Trump. And for obviously, you know, 180-degree different reasons, but both based on race.” —director Rob Reiner

Non Compos Mentis: “If you are concerned about the Supreme Court, please consider going to this website and signing a petition asking President Obama to ‘appoint’ Merrick Garland. … He has the power to do this since Congress has refused to vote, and apparently that can be considered a waiver of its rights to advise and consent.” —Barbra Streisand

Just a little over-the-top, dramatic and emotional: “I watched our incredible first lady, Michelle Obama, talk in New Hampshire about how hurt she felt [hearing Trump demean women]. She talked about how women are often afraid to say anything because we’re worried that we will appear weak — that we’ll be told we’re being over-the-top, dramatic, emotional. But we’re not. We’re fighting for our lives.” —Lady Gaga

And last… “An anti-Trump protest was thrown into total confusion and bewilderment when somebody shouted, ‘Let’s meet here again tomorrow after work!’” —Twitter satirist @weknowwhatsbest

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.