Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

MAY 23,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:56 P.M. ET: 

FRENCH MILITANT ON SYRIA – From Reuters:  "PARIS - Most French people are in favor of military intervention by France in Syria, a poll showed on Saturday, a sharp reversal from a survey in 2013 when the majority opposed government plans for air strikes against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.  France has been providing weapons to opposition Syrian Kurdish forces but has repeatedly ruled out a military operation in Syria without a United Nations mandate.  It was the first country to join the US-led coalition carrying out air strikes on Islamic State insurgents in Iraq and Syria, but ruled out taking part in strikes on targets inside Syrian borders for fear it would benefit Assad."  MacArthur said that all military disasters begin with two words:  too late.  It may already be too late for Syria.

ANOTHER GREAT MOMENT IN EDUCATION – From The College Fix:  "An upcoming workshop scheduled to take place at the University of Wisconsin-Madison aims to teach campus radicals and socialists how to manipulate campus resources to advance their agenda.  'Undercommoning: A workshop on becoming a thief in the university,' was the exact wording of the subject line in a recent group email sent to University of Wisconsin-Madison scholars and others announcing the event, set for June 4.  The symposium, which will also be transmitted to a wider audience via Google Hangout, is described as a chance for campus radicals – students and scholars alike – to brainstorm ideas among their 'newly formed Undercommoning Collective' on how to influence university resources and advance their socialist agenda and provocative causes.  Organizers did not respond to repeated requests for comment by The College Fix."  State university.  Receives federal aid.  Your tax dollars at work.

LEGAL NEWS – The art of the shakedown, learned from the master.  From the New York Post:  "Al Sharpton's daughter reportedly is suing New York City for $5 million after she fell in the street and sprained her ankle.  According to the New York Post, Dominique Sharpton, 28, says in court records she was 'severely injured, bruised and wounded' after tripping on uneven pavement in downtown Manhattan in October.  Sharpton says she still suffers from the injury, the Post reported.  She reportedly was pictured in a walking boot in the weeks following the fall, but participated in a National Action Network March in December and was pictured climbing a ladder to decorate a Christmas tree."  No settlement, no peace!

May 23, 2015       Permalink

SICKENING – AT 12:18 P.M. ET:  We learn more about what living under ISIS is really like.  From The Times of Israel: 

A UN envoy has returned from a tour of Iraq and Syria with harrowing reports of the sexual violence systematically committed by Islamic State militants against women and girls.

Zainab Bangura, who had set out for the region in April to address the rampant cases of rape, sex slavery and other sexual violence in the areas under IS control, said the extremists were “institutionalizing sexual violence” as a tactic to terrorize the local populations.

In an interview this week with the Middle East Eye, a UK-based news site, Bangura recounted chilling tales she had heard from refugees.

“After attacking a village, IS splits women from men and executes boys and men aged 14 and over. The women and mothers are separated; girls are stripped naked, tested for virginity and examined for breast size and prettiness. The youngest, and those considered the prettiest virgins fetch higher prices and are sent to Raqqa, the IS stronghold,” she said.

“There is a hierarchy: sheikhs get first choice, then emirs, then fighters. They often take three or four girls each and keep them for a month or so, until they grow tired of a girl, when she goes back to market. At slave auctions, buyers haggle fiercely, driving down prices by disparaging girls as flat-chested or unattractive.

COMMENT:  This is revolting.  But notice the silence, once again, of so-called "feminist" groups.  Their betrayal of women is a major story, yet is ignored by the mainstream media.   ISIS is growing in power.  Among other things, it is a ghastly threaten to women throughout the Mideast.  It is a far more extreme version of the already-extreme Taliban.

May 23, 2015       Permalink

DEMS SCARED OF MARCO – AT 11:34 A.M. ET:  And they should be.  Democratic operatives are starting to realize what a threat Marco Rubio is to Hillary Clinton.  From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — They use words like “historic” and “charismatic,” phrases like “great potential” and “million-dollar smile.” They notice audience members moved to tears by an American-dream-come-true success story. When they look at the cold, hard political math, they get uneasy.

An incipient sense of anxiety is tugging at some Democrats — a feeling tersely captured in four words from a blog post written recently by a seasoned party strategist in Florida: “Marco Rubio scares me.”

What is so unnerving to them at this early phase of the 2016 presidential campaign still seems, at worst, a distant danger: the prospect of a head-to-head general-election contest between Mr. Rubio, the Republican senator from Florida, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Yet the worriers include some on Mrs. Clinton’s team. And even former President Bill Clinton is said to worry that Mr. Rubio could become the Republican nominee, whittle away at Mrs. Clinton’s support from Hispanics and jeopardize her chances of carrying Florida’s vital 29 electoral votes.

Democrats express concerns not only about whether Mr. Rubio, 43, a son of Cuban immigrants, will win over Hispanic voters, a growing and increasingly important slice of the electorate. They also worry that he would offer a sharp generational contrast to Mrs. Clinton, a fixture in American politics for nearly a quarter-century who will turn 69 before the election.

COMMENT:  The worries are legitimate.  Rubio is a terrific campaigner, and knows the issues cold.  Put him on a stage next to Hillary Clinton, whose image is increasingly one of an aging corruptionist, and Rubio shines. 

The Dems may counter with a Hispanic vice-presidential nominee, but it's the top of the ticket that decides the election.  It's often said in presidential politics that a vice-presidential selection can only hurt, never help.  That's not completely true, as vice-presidential nominee Lyndon Johnson did effective work for Jack Kennedy in 1960, but it's largely true.

May 23, 2015       Permalink

DOWN AND DOWN – AT 11:15 A.M. ET:  Hillary Clinton's favorability ratings continue to decline, but Democrats still seem ready to nominate her for the highest office.  Hey, what's a little corruption to worry about?  From the Washington Examiner: 

As Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton fights through several mini-scandals, her approval rating has been skidding, sending her "favorability" rating to a seven-year low.

In a new report, Pew Research Center said that her rating crossed the 50 percent mark this month and now sits at 49 percent. It was lower, at 48 percent, way back in May 2008 when she was being pushed out of the presidential race by then Sen. Barack Obama.

It has been a steady fall from the 66 percent favorable rating she had as secretary of state in November 2009.

Pew's report provided a graph of her favorability ratings dating back to when she was the first lady of Arkansas and before her husband Bill Clinton was elected president.

Of her recent numbers, Pew said: "Hillary Clinton's favorability rating has fallen since last August, when 58 percent had a favorable impression of her and 41 percent held an unfavorable view. Today, views of Clinton are divided: 49 percent have a favorable opinion of the former secretary of state; 47 percent have an unfavorable opinion.

COMMENT:  And this is even before the Republicans turn up the heat.  It's not hard to imagine what a campaign against Hillary will be like.

The wild card, though, is the media.   We know it tilts left, and "tilts" is a soft description.  Will it automatically fall in line behind Hillary?  I believe most journalists will, but I think we're also seeing a mini-revolt on the part of some reporters, even at The New York Times.  I mean, how much treachery can you take in a presidential candidate?  Also, the thought of a female president is not as compelling to the left as the thought was of a black candidate, meaning Obama. 

The question is whether there'll be enough media dissent this time to make a difference.  I have no idea.

May 23,  2015     Permalink

MAY 22,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET:

ISIS BOAST – From Britain's Independent:  "Isis has used the latest issue of its propaganda magazine Dabiq to suggest the group is expanding so rapidly it could buy its first nuclear weapon within a year.  The hyperbolic article, which the group attributes to the British hostage John Cantlie, claims Isis has transcended its roots as 'the most explosive Islamic "group" in the modern world' to evolve into 'the most explosive Islamic movement the modern world has ever seen' in less than twelve months."  Might be hype right now, but think of the reality ten years from now.

HILLARY THE LITERATE – From Daily Caller:  "Emails released Friday by the State Department show that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton mixed up the names of the Americans murdered at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012.  Clinton sent an email with the subject line 'Chris Smith' shortly before midnight to three top aides, Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nuland.  'Cheryl told me the Libyans confirmed his death. Should we announce tonight or wait until morning?' Clinton wrote.  Four Americans were killed that night after a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda stormed the consulate. But none were named Chris Smith. Clinton likely jumbled the names of ambassador Chris Stevens and diplomat Sean Smith. Two former Navy SEALs, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, were also killed."  Her attention to detail has always been breathtaking.

WHERE'S THE UPROAR OVER THIS? – From Fox:  "Omaha lost a dedicated police officer and community leader this week, but Olivia Ruth lost even more - the mother she will never know.  As the family of Kerrie Orozco grieved for the 29-year-old, seven-year veteran following her death Wednesday in a shootout with a fugitive, the city's flags flew at half-staff, the police department rallied behind the simple phrase 'Kerrie On,' and donations poured in for Olivia Ruth, the baby Orozco had just given birth to prematurely. Orozco was working her last shift before going on maternity leave to be with her baby when a criminal's bullet struck her just above the bulletproof vest that might have saved her life."  It would be nice to have a comment from "social justice" crowd, including those who've recently graced us on TV with their brilliant remarks about Baltimore.

May 22, 2015       Permalink

BANISH THIS MAN, BANISH HIM IMMEDIATELY – AT 9:25 A.M. ET:  A heretic arises, and must be stopped for the good of...the kids.  From Daily Caller:

Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000 years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.

Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back 8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global temperature changes over the 20th Century.

What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees Celsius– higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the world has warmed over the last century.

“This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations,” Lloyd wrote in his study.

The United Nations’ IPCC claims there’s been 0.85 degrees Celsius of warming since the late 1800s, and concludes that most of this warming is due to human activities– mainly, the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use. The IPCC says that “more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010” have been caused by human activity.

If Lloyd’s results hold, the IPCC may have to revise how much warming it attributes to mankind. In any case, the IPCC’s estimate of man-made and natural warming (0.85 degrees) is still below the standard deviation for the last 8,000, according to Lloyd’s results. This means that warming is not very significant within the context of the Earth’s recent climate history.

COMMENT:  Does this man have any future?  If you have employment for him available, let us know.  But you may need extra security.

May 22, 2015       Permalink

PUBLIC EXPECTS PRESS BIAS IN 2016 – AT 8:22 A.M. ET:  The public is on to how the mainstream media biases its reports.  This is a devastating vote of no confidence in the media.  From Rasmussen Reports:

In the wake of the George Stephanopoulos scandal, most voters doubt the accuracy of political news coverage and think most reporters will slant their coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% of Likely U.S. Voters now do not trust the political news they are getting. That's a 16-point jump from 45% last October. Twenty-one percent (21%) still have confidence in the political coverage they get, but that's down from 33% in the earlier survey. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

When it comes to the 2016 presidential campaign, only 23% believe most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage. Fifty-nine percent (59%) think that coverage will be slanted instead, with 36% who say most reporters will try to help Hillary Clinton during the campaign and 23% who say they will try to hurt her bid for the White House instead. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

Three months before the 2012 presidential election, 74% of voters said most reporters when covering a political campaign try to help the candidate they want to win, consistent with surveying for several years prior to that. Fifty-one percent (51%) expected most reporters would try to help President Obama at that time, while only nine percent (9%) thought they would be biased in favor of his GOP opponent Mitt Romney. These findings were nearly identical to those just before Election Day in November 2008. At that time, 51% felt most reporters had tried to help Obama win the presidency, while only seven percent (7%) thought they had tried to help Republican candidate John McCain.

COMMENT:  We hope that the impact of press bias will diminish as more and more Americans start to realize how many media outlets operate.  But many Americans will not realize it, and they will be influenced by biased coverage.  Their numbers may be enough to swing a presidential election.

May 22, 2015       Permalink

TRAGEDY – AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  ISIS is advancing even further.  This looks very bad.  From AFP:

In a new move consolidating its grip in Syria, IS seized on Thursday Al-Tanaf, the last regime-held crossing on the border with Iraq, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. With their gains in Palmyra earlier Thursday, the monitor said the jihadists now control half of Syria’s territory.

The monitor said IS control of Al-Tanaf, known as Al-Walid by Iraqis, means Syrian government forces have lost control over the porous border.

The Observatory said jihadists spread out Thursday through Palmyra, including at the archaeological site in the city’s southwest, and executed 17 people accused of “working with the regime.”

The Islamic State group seized Syria’s Palmyra on Thursday, as UNESCO warned that the destruction of the ancient city would be “an enormous loss to humanity.”

US President Barack Obama played down the developments, saying he didn’t think the US was “losing” to IS.

COMMENT:  He doesn't, does he?  The field marshal must be getting his intelligence reports from Mickey Mouse.  If we're not losing, where, precisely, are we winning?  Public opinion polls are showing substantial public apprehension over our collapse in the Mideast.  But Obamans listen only to themselves and their thesis advisers.  Obama is either delusional, or his ego is now in complete control of everything he does.

May 22, 2015       Permalink

BUYING INFLUENCE – AT 8:06 A.M. ET:  It looks worse and worse for the Clintons and their financial schemes.  From WaPo:

The Clinton Foundation reported Thursday that it has received as much as $26.4 million in previously undisclosed payments from major corporations, universities, foreign sources and other groups.

The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign.

The money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.

According to the new information, the Clintons have delivered 97 speeches to benefit the charity since 2002. Colleges and universities sponsored more than two dozen of these speeches, along with U.S. and overseas corporations and at least one foreign government, Thailand.

The payments were disclosed late Thursday on the organization’s Web site, with speech payments listed in ranges rather than specific amounts. In total, the payments ranged between $12 million and $26.4 million.

The paid appearances included speeches by former president Bill Clinton to the Ni­ger­ian ThisDay newspaper group for at least $500,000 and to the Beijing Huaduo Enterprise Consulting Company Ltd., an investment holding company that specializes in the natural gas market, for at least $250,000. Citibank paid at least $250,000 for a speech by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

COMMENT:  What really gets me, aside from the appearance of a pay-to-play scheme, is payments from universities.  What wisdom could they possibly get from these political bandits?  And why should hard-earned tuition money or alumni contributions be used to pay exorbitant speaking fees? 

Everywhere the Clintons go, scandal and poor taste follow.  They won't need their faces on Mount Rushmore.  They'll buy their own mountain.

May 22,  2015     Permalink