|
|
|
|
|
|
Right Analysis | Right Hooks | Right Opinion
Patriot Headlines | Grassroots Commentary
Daily Digest
December 4, 2015 
THE FOUNDATION
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes." —Cesare Beccaria
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
 |
| Triple facepalm |
Facts are stubborn things. In the wake of the Islamist attack in San Bernardino, Barack Obama trotted out the usual blame-the-gun rhetoric: "We have a pattern of mass shootings in this country with no parallel anywhere else in the world." That was after he claimed in a Tuesday press conference (in Paris, of all places), "This just doesn't happen in other countries." Repeat, ad nauseum. But is it really true?
This doesn't happen in the Middle East, Africa and Asia? As you might guess whenever Obama opens his mouth, no, it's not true. The U.S. is pretty much in the middle of the pack for mass murder committed with firearms, both in the frequency and death rate. In fact, according to gun researcher John Lott, "In just 2015, France suffered more casualties — killings and injuries — from mass public shootings than the U.S. has suffered during Obama's entire presidency (508 to 424)."
As for the number of mass shooting incidents in the U.S., we've noted before that the Leftmedia uses completely BS statistics collected by anti-gun fanatics. How inflated are those numbers? The Mass Shooting Tracker website claims the San Bernardino attack was the 355th "mass shooting" this year, but its deliberately inflated definition includes, for example, non-fatal incidents with pellet guns and they count attackers in the number shot, dead or not. The Congressional Research Service, on the other hand, still defines "mass killing" widely — "three or more killings in a single incident" — and even then there were 317 mass shootings ... from 1999 to 2013. That also doesn't distinguish between a random public mass murder and a man killing his wife and in-laws. Overall, firearms-related homicides have dropped dramatically over the last two decades, all while gun ownership has greatly increased.
So what do Democrats do? Propose the same old "universal background checks" idea that would do nothing to stop the two San Bernardino terrorists — or most other deranged killers. They want to ban "assault rifles," too, though California law is already especially strict on this. And there are reports that the couple modified at least one rifle in an attempt to make it fully automatic. Such modification is illegal in all states, but by all means let's make it super illegal this time. Oh, and using any kind of firearm to murder people is illegal everywhere, too, but that doesn't ever seem to stop murderous psychos.
Meanwhile, leftists go out of their way to shame those who pray for the victims. Tolerance, indeed, and facts be damned along the way.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday morning that the U.S. economy added 211,000 jobs in November while the headline unemployment rate cruised at a low 5%. This most likely means the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates later this month as Chairwoman Janet Yellen told the Senate Thursday that the board was going to examine the report, hoping to see "a continued solid trend of job creation."
Additionally, average hourly wages increased four cents to $25.25, which puts wage growth this year at 2.3%, ever so slightly outpacing inflation. But not everything is solid, though. The U-6 measure of unemployment edged up to 9.9% because 319,000 people were forced to move to part-time work. As for the kinds of jobs created, much of the growth occurred in construction (46,000 jobs) and professional and technical services (28,000). The mining industry, however, continued to bleed from its peak last December, losing 11,000 jobs. This economic depression in the landscape of moderately good news can be attributed to the Obama administration's regulation. Its crusade against coal has decimated the economy of West Virginia, and he did unions no favors in blocking the Keystone pipeline.
Furthermore, despite rising wages, the Left is still insisting on a $15-an-hour minimum wage, which will only increase unemployment and smother the meager gains in the average wage. So whatever happens in the coming weeks, the Obama administration cannot take credit for leading the economy out of the great recession because it's regulation-happy tendencies have exacerbated the problem.
Hillary Clinton walked into a blaring hypocrisy of her own making Thursday when a woman at a New Hampshire campaign event asked the presidential candidate about her record on sexual assault. For the past several months, Clinton tried to endear herself to feminists who want to come down harshly on anyone accused of rape. For example, Clinton tweeted Nov. 22, "Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported." On Thursday, while Clinton was sitting beneath a sign that emblazoned her logo and the words "fighting for us," a woman asked, "You recently came out to say that all rape victims should be believed? But would you say that about Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones? Should we believe them as well?"
Those were some of the women who accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault in the '90s. But instead of believing them, Hillary attacked the women, ruining their reputations. By aligning herself with her cheating husband, Clinton, who once defended a child-rapist by dragging the victim "through hell," kept her ticket to political power. In response to the question, Clinton responded, "I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence." This is not the answer the people who believe men accused of rape are guilty until proven innocent wanted to hear. And frankly, as commentator Ashe Schow noted, it's an answer that leaves many other questions.
Help Us Help You
Patti from Alabama writes, "A sincere thank you for being the Voice of Essential Liberty for us all. We stand tall and proud as Patriots of this great country, but feel constantly trod upon by those who are either un- or ill-informed. It is your publication that continues to give us strength to stand up for what we believe in, no matter the consequences. ... Thanks for helping to keep conservative voices heard above all the Washington political rabble. Keep up the good work!"
The Patriot Post's Daily Digest is a one-of-a-kind collection of the best conservative analysis of hot-button issues in politics, media and culture. Our team works tirelessly to consolidate all of this content into a quick-reading analytical summary that you won't find anywhere else.
Your support keeps this priceless resource coming to your inbox every weekday. Please help us by making a secure online donation today. If you prefer to support us by mail, please send your donation with our printable donor form. Thank you for your support. —Nate Jackson, Managing Editor
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
By Arnold Ahlert
In one of the most brazen gambits of the year, five Mexican illegal immigrants and two Latino-focused nonprofit organizations filed suit seeking to reverse Oregon voters' rejection of a measure granting illegal immigrants state "driver's cards." Unsurprisingly, the so-called race card is an integral part of the mix.
Measure 88, which would have provided driver's cards to those who couldn't prove they're in the country legally, failed by a whopping margin of 66.1% to 33.9% during the 2014 mid-term election. Voters in 35 of Oregon's 36 counties and every congressional district in the state rejected the measure, even though Oregon is a Democrat stronghold, and the pro-illegal constituency outspent their opponents by a 10 to 1 margin.
In other words, when Democrat voters get a say on the issue they stand in direct opposition to Democrat politicians — the very same Democrat politicians who label any resistance to their pro-amnesty agenda as bigoted and xenophobic.
Regardless, Democrat Party allies filed suit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Eugene, alleging that Measure 88 is unconstitutional because it is "arbitrary" and "capricious," "motivated, at least in part, by animus towards Mexicans and Central Americans," and violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment. Democrat Gov. Kate Brown and Department of Transportation leaders are named as defendants in the case.
Cynthia Kendoll, president of Oregonians for Immigration Reform, put the issue in proper perspective. "People were not swayed by their arguments that they deserve to have a driver's card so they could more easily get to their jobs," she said. "They're not supposed to be working here."
Kendoll further insisted the electorate was motivated by national security concerns and Mexican drug cartels — not race. She noted that illegals haven't received immigration checks, and that licenses would facilitate their ability to transport narcotics up and down the West Coast.
There is considerable weight to her argument. In October, Breitbart News reported the bust of "a massive Mexican cartel methamphetamine (meth) ring" in Oregon, one that "spanned from the Mexican state of Michoacán through Texas, California, and Oregon." Many of the 24 defendants charged in the case are illegal aliens, and court documents obtained by Breitbart reveal collaboration between the cartels and domestic gangs, as well as the news that Mexican cartels are manufacturing meth domestically, not just importing it. This latest roundup follows a 2013 cartel-related narcotics bust characterized by law enforcement officials as "the largest one-day roundup of drug-dealing suspects in recent Oregon history."
Nonetheless, the suit was filed on behalf of five anonymous illegals, all of whom came to Oregon from Mexico before 2000, making them eligible for a short-term driver's licenses under state law SB 833. That legislation was signed in 2013 by disgraced former Democrat Gov. John Kitzhaber, granting driver's cards to those who couldn't prove they were in Oregon legally. The card was a substitute for driver's licenses that requires proof of U.S. citizenship or lawful presence in the country, according to a 2008 state law.
Opponents of the measure vowed to initiate a voter referendum in 2014 and submitted nearly 71,000 signatures to do so. Of that total, 58,291 were validated, putting the measure on the ballot where it was roundly defeated.
Yet as is so often the case when voters reject the progressive agenda, the sore losers then turned to the courts. Joining the five illegals are Familias en Accion and Los Ninos Cuentan, two Portland-area nonprofit groups who contend the law forces them to "spend significant time and to divert limited resources" to provide transportation for their "clients."
Adding insult to injury, the suit seeks class action certification to include everyone who might have qualified for the driver's card. Legislative staff estimates that a whopping 84,000 driver's cards would have been issued in the first nine months following SB 833's passage, revealing the stakes in play here.
Norman Williams, associate dean for academic affairs at Willamette University College of Law in Salem, contends the plaintiffs' best argument is to exploit the equal protection clause and insist the state has no rational basis for depriving illegal aliens from Latin America the right to drive on state roads. He further contended they don't have to prove every Oregon voter was racially motivated, but rather that "there were enough voters who voted 'no' who were prompted to do so because of racial concerns, that could have tipped the balance."
Given the lopsided voting results, how they would do that remains a mystery. Furthermore, the demand for class action certification should infuriate a vast majority of Oregonian voters, not just because their votes might be tossed aside, but because there is only one defining characteristic of that class: every member of it is in this nation illegally. More likely that is the "animus" that drove the majority of Oregonian voters in 2014.
Williams believes the plaintiffs' chances for success are slim, admitting, "Federal judges are very hesitant to strike down state statutes on constitutional grounds." Maybe, but as wide-open borders, sanctuary cities and Barack Obama's unconstitutional efforts to legalize millions of illegals indicate, Rule of Law often takes a back seat to leftist political shenanigans — shenanigans often sanctioned by the courts.
Thus the American Left has opened up another front in its continuing war against Rule of Law and the democratic process. In a better nation, the notion that a federal court could kick states' rights to the curb in an effort to elevate the demands of illegal immigrants over the votes of American citizens would be seen as the contemptuous nonsense it truly represents.
In this nation, however, states that wish to confer privileges on law-breakers have been free to do so, even when those privileges conflict with federal immigration law. The American Left now insists that states should be forced to do so. The fundamental transformation of the U.S. into a banana republic requires nothing less.
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
For more, visit Right Opinion.
TOP HEADLINES
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report
OPINION IN BRIEF
Michelle Malkin: "While the White House pays lip service to homeland security vigilance, it consorts with Islamic terror sympathizers who attack vigilant citizens and law enforcement officers at every turn. Yes, I'm looking at you, Council on American-Islamic Relations. After seeing CAIR's bizarre press conference with the San Bernardino jihadists' family members, here's what I'd like to say to them: You are not to be trusted.
You put damage control above border control and jihad control. You are enemies of our national security and sovereignty. Reminder: The feds designated CAIR an unindicted terror co-conspirator in 2007 in the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation and others for providing support to Hamas jihadists. Over the alleged objections of Dallas-area federal prosecutors, the Obama Justice Department's senior political appointees declined to press terror-financing charges against CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad. Instead, the administration has rolled out the red carpet for CAIR officials 'hundreds' of times since 2009 on a 'range of issues.' ... Little wonder, then, that in this politically correct climate of intimidation, a neighbor of the San Bernardino jihadists told local media this week that he had 'noticed a half-dozen Middle Eastern men in the area in recent weeks, but decided not to report anything since he did not wish to racially profile those people.' That's the CAIR effect: See something, do nothing. Silence is complicity."
SHORT CUTS
Insight: "The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves; a contest, that — however bloody — can, in the nature of things, never be finally closed, so long as man refuses to be a slave." —Lysander Spooner (1808-1887)
Belly laugh of the week: "It appears to be a kind of hybrid workplace jihad." —ABC's Brian Ross, the same guy who wrongly blamed a Tea Party member for a previous mass murder
Dezinformatsia: "[T]he fact of the matter is, among developed nations, [Obama's right]. These sorts of mass shooting with the regularity of where they occur in the United States — you don't find that in other countries." —Fox News' Shepherd Smith
Alpha Jackass: "[The NRA is] a quasi militant wing of the Republican party. They're being pushed more and more into the camp of guns for everybody any time they want them. And they're being pushed by — they have a competitor now, gun owners of America." —Harry Reid
Non Compos Mentis: "Sensible gun laws work. We've proven it in California and we are not going to give up." —Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) ("ATF Says Weapons Used in San Bernardino Shooting Were Illegal in California" —PJ Media)
Demo-gogues: "Gun violence is a crisis of epidemic proportion in our nation. We've had far too many moments of silence on the floor of the House. And while it is right to respectfully acknowledge the losses, we can no longer remain silent. What gives us the right to hold moments of silence when we do nothing to act upon the cause of the grief?" —Nancy Pelosi
Village Idiots: "In this incident, of course not." —Obama spokesman Josh Earnest's candid response to whether Democrats' background check proposals would have stopped the San Bernardino Islamist attack
And last... "An entire presidency predicated on Twitter accounts and hashtags is going to lecture about prayers not being enough. Beyond parody." —Stephen Miller
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Patriot Post (http://patriotpost.us/subscribe/ )"
The Patriot Post
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401
|
|
|
