Posse Incitatus

Auf Wiederhesen, Deutschland

German Chancellor Angela Merkel must be certifiably insane.

She has agreed to take in nearly 1 million refugees from Syria and other war-torn nations that have been destroyed by the cauldron of Islam. An astounding 10,000 refugees per day have been swamping Germany, and Merkel has been under increasing pressure to stem the tide.

Merkel, of the Christian Democratic Union, assumed office 10 years ago this month. She was supposed to be a moderate, but I am sure millions of Germans have been aghast and appalled at her suicidal decision to roll out the welcome mat to Islam.

Let's be frank: The vast majority of the Islamic immigrants in European nations do not want to assimilate with western European culture and society. They are fleeing hellhole conditions in their own countries that largely resulted from the dysfunctional religion to which they belong. But instead of being grateful for receiving the opportunity to live and work in a safe, secure, economically prosperous and pluralistic nation, they exhibit a sickening insolence. Some of them have the gall to want to implement sharia law in their host country. Talk about ingrates!

Alarmingly, Muslim families are often large. They multiply rapidly and extensively. Conversely, European cultures in Germany, France, England, Spain and other countries are in decline (generally the birth rate languishes between 1 and 2 per woman). Marriage is less common, and childless marriages are commonplace.

Consider this: Even if only 1 percent, .1 percent or .01 percent of the Muslim immigrants are Islamofascists who wish to commit terrorist acts against their host country, rolling out the welcome mat will prove disastrous. Mark my words, deep trouble is coming to Europe in the very near future.

Additionally, the Obama administration B.S. that all immigrants are thoroughly vetted (this applies to the United States, but certainly the Germans make the same claim), ranks with bunk such as "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," and the Benghazi fiasco being precipitated by an offensive anti-Islam video. This administration wouldn't know the truth if it hit 'em in the face.

Syria, Iraq and the other nations from which these refugees hail, do not have a solid data infrastructure (social security numbers, bank accounts, law enforcement records, tax files, et al) plus the physical hardware (servers, fiber optics, wireless networks) to ensure that accurate vetting can take place. Too, the governments of these godforsaken nations are often rife with corruption. Give a bureaucrat a big enough bribe, and he'll be glad to produce and provide you with an "official" government document attesting to your identity and integrity. Moreover, the difficulty and confusion arising from Arabic-to-English name spellings (remember how many ways "Gaddafi" was spelled by newspapers?) further muddies the waters.

It is no surprise that neo-Nazi sympathizers have been flexing their muscles in recent weeks in Germany, and that Merkel's popularity has declined. Germans are not stupid, and they thoroughly understand their nation's history. 

The question is, why doesn't Merkel have a clue? I don't have an answer. But, with so much of the idiocy and insanity that has unfolded on the world stage in recent years, I am resigned to throwing up my hands and thinking, "Truth is stranger than fiction."

That and reciting the Serenity Prayer.

 

 

Thankfulness and ingratitude

I see we were remiss in blogging yesterday (and the day before that...) but such is the news environment that I find myself trying to limit my exposure to internet.  Last week I went four days without firing home the home computer and enjoyed it immensely.

Still, the world continues to turn, whether we pay attention or not. 

I couldn't help but notice that once again the left has put out its useless and easily-parodied "How to Talk to Your Conservative Relative" talking point.  They have been properly mocked all over the internet, and I have nothing to add here.

What I would like to address is the failure of these leftists to contemplate the actual point of the holiday - which (contrary to their propaganda) is not to celebrate the military conquest of New England nor is it a celebration of how armed refugees imposed their religion on their hosts.

It's about appreciating what you have.  You know, giving thanks.

If we are to be honest, the one trait above all others that progressives (and their millennial shock troopers) lack is a sense of gratitude.

They are the most pampered, most spoiled generation in human history, and yet they whine incessantly about how hard life is.  Thanksgiving should properly be a time for them to reflect on the bounty around them, but instead it is all about what they don't have but still want.

This is a recipe for misery.

Here at the Posse, we often point out to our younger members how fortunate we are to live in this time and place.  I often note that it was not that long ago that there was no electricity.  Instead of turning up the heat a notch when the weather turns cold, one might have to venture outside and chop wood by hand. 

Moreover, the United States is a peaceful country.  Yes, there are pockets where crime is high relative to other places, but it is still safer than almost any other civilization.  There are no rampaging hordes laying siege to our cities, burning the crops and slaughtering the inhabitants wholesale - or selling them into slavery.

As always, I am grateful for Faith, Family and Freedom.  I hope our readers had a peaceful and enjoyable holiday and offer our belated wishes for a happy Thanksgiving weekend.

Liberalism's Toll on Cities

It has become patently clear for decades that long-time liberal rule wreaks havoc on cities and states. Detroit is Exhibit A: More than 40 years of Democrats in charge led to high taxes, rampant crime, decayed neighborhoods, failing schools, massive corruption, greedy and self-serving public employee unions, pension fund graft, a steadily declining population, and finally, in 2013, bankruptcy.

The Motor City, which in 1950 had 1.8 million residents not including the suburbs, now has about 670,000 people. Many of its abandoned and arson-wracked homes have been leveled, leaving scores of empty blocks deemed "urban prairies." Indeed, urban farming is thriving in Detroit. Yes, you heard me right: Farming, in the city that laid the blueprint for assembly line production, the city that put America on wheels, the city whose industrial might earned it the title "Arsenal of Democracy" during World War II.

Under Mayor Mike Duggan and some more honest and competent city council members, Detroit has emerged from bankruptcy and is on the road to recovery. But it will be a long, hard road, because the damage progressive politics did was severe and cannot be overcome in a brief period of time.

Across the nation, cities ruled by Democrats have suffered the same types of pathologies as Detroit, although not to the same severe extent. You could name hundreds of cities with longtime Democrat rule that are hollowed out, with desolate, dangerous neighborhoods, high unemployment and hellhole schools. And adding insult to injury, ridiculously high property taxes -- and often a city income tax to boot -- really stick it to the long-suffering residents.

As a frequent reader of online news articles and blogs, as well as discussion forums, I have seen my argument presented quite often. And invariably, a liberal or liberals will respond with something like this: There are many successful, prosperous cities that have been led by progressives for decades. Boston, San Francisco, Seattle, as well as smaller university towns such as Ann Arbor, Mich., Madison, Wis., and Austin, Texas. 

But I seldom see a rebuttal to this response, even though it's a slow pitch right over the plate, to use that old baseball analogy. Allow me to hit it out of the park.

On the surface, cities like San Francisco may seem like a liberal paradise: Beautiful homes, upscale shopping districts with plenty of trendy restaurants, night clubs & coffee shops, plus avant garde art galleries, clothing stores and the like. Leftist ordinances proliferate, including decriminalized pot, transgendered bathrooms and the ubiquitous "sanctuary city" status for illegal immigrants.

But look beneath the surface at what's really happening in many of these liberal paradises. High property taxes and rents force lower income people into homelessness or shelters. Many of the service industry employees who work in the hotels and restaurants must ride miserable public buses for hours to and from work because their homes are 50 miles away. Too, a considerable number of middle-class and upper middle-class workers endure lengthy, grinding commutes to and from work each day because, despite earning a decent salary, they cannot afford to live near where they work. This is another quality of life issue that may not be so obvious to the casual observer.

Meanwhile, in cities coast to coast (not just sanctuary cities),  illegal immigrants commit crimes against innocent victims, endanger motorists with drunken driving, and burden hospital emergency rooms and local social service agencies with a litany of medical, psychological and substance abuse problems.

San Francisco has so coddled homeless people, many of whom are mentally ill, have substance abuse problems and need professional help, that it has dramatically degraded the quality of life. In the city's public library, patrons have had to put up with disgusting behavior by homeless vagrants, who have bathed in bathroom sinks, changed clothes in restrooms and dealt drugs in or near library buildings. Public defecation has been a real and serious problem. Isn't progressivism wonderful?

Liberal cities typically have horrible public schools, so white liberals who make good money, can afford to live in a nice neighborhood and have school age children invariably send their progeny to private schools. But woe unto poor black and hispanic families, for their children are often consigned to the run-down, drug-infested, gang-ridden hellhole schools. The corrupt politicians and teachers' unions conspire to oppose charter schools and educational vouchers, in effect waging war on minority children's future prospects.

Yes, some liberal cities have great neighborhoods, impressive culture, vibrant shopping districts and fairly low crime. But look beyond the surface issues, and the wreckage of liberalism will undoubtedly manifest itself.

Will France Invoke the NATO treaty?

By all appearances, the attack on Paris was well-planned and coordinated by ISIS-trained or led agents.

Given the US response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, there is precedent for France to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty, calling on the Atlantic alliance to assist in waging war against ISIS.

The question is:  Will France do it?

On the one hand, NATO exists for just this purpose.  France lacks the military capability to take the fight to ISIS.  Only the combined forces of NATO have that capability.

At the same time, the NATO members are themselves awash in migrant populations, fearful of civil disorder and worried about their own feeble military establishments.

Then there is Turkey.  If Turkey refuses to join the campaign, the alliance will likely fracture.

France has been hit again and again by terror attacks, each escalating in scope and sophistication.  The Charlie Hebdo massacre was stupidly written off as something the magazine brought on itself, and so the warning was ignored.

Can this attack be ignored?  How many more innocents must die before Europe rouses itself? 

Islam is Pushing its Luck

It's happened again: Muslim fundamentalists have mounted multiple attacks in Paris involving suicide bombers and men with automatic weapons. An estimated 100 people are dead and scores injured as of 7 p.m. EST, and hostages are being held in a concert hall. The attacks also took place at a soccer stadium, shopping mall and several restaurants.

French President Francois Hollande has declared a state of emergency and closed the borders. French special forces are responding as I type, the situation is fluid, and several gunmen are reportedly at large.

Once again, President Obama has given a lame, mealy-mouthed statement and said he would not speculate on who was responsible for the attacks. Can you believe that? From the so-called leader of the free world?

I have supported the general belief that most Muslims do not engage in or support terrorism. But I have also emphasized that there's a considerable, alarmingly sizable minority of Muslims who do engage in and support terrorism. There are also millions of mainstream Muslims who do not speak out against those who kill, maim and torture in the name of Islam. Do they secretly, in their hearts, support these atrocities even if they are ashamed to admit it out loud?

I absolutely don't buy the leftist P.C. that ISIS, al Qaeda and other Islamofascists have "hijacked a great religion" and do not represent Islam. The fact is, they do represent Islam as interpreted by a large number of people. Islam is open to interpretation, big time. But there is very little hope of reforming this religion when it is decentralized and thousands of its clerics interpret its scripture in vastly different ways.

The events in Paris ought to cause great consternation to Germans, Spanish, French, Danes and other Europeans in light of the recent hordes of Muslim immigrants flooding the continent from Syria, Iraq, and various African nations.

But on a broader level, Islam had better watch its back. The patience of non-Muslims may well be wearing thin as the bloodshed and barbarism continue unabated. I am not advocating revenge or a religious war; just stating that we are fast reaching a tipping point.

President Obama's decision to let thousands of unvetted Muslims into our nation may well prove to be his most destructive policy, and that's saying something when one considers the damage this bull-in-a-china-shop has done. If the United States becomes a target of the types of attacks Paris has endured today and last winter (Charlie Hebdo massacre), the community-organizer-in-chief will be primarily to blame.

Muslims who oppose terrorism need to firmly take back their religion and advocate a stern, swift crackdown on its violent practitioners. Because if they don't, far bloodier days may lie ahead.

 

Veterans Day 2015

There is a quirk in human behavior that causes people to speak at great length in favor of things they find tiresome and don't believe, but want people to think are important to them.  Shakespeare alluded to this with his famous "methinks the lady dost protest too much," line, but like so many elements of the Bard's work, it perfectly encapsulates actual human behavior.

The treatment of veterans by Democrats falls squarely into this category.  On the one hand, Dm politicians almost uniformly fawn over veterans, surrounding themselves with them at events, lauding their service and sucking up to the groups that represent them.

Yet in practice, veterans under this administration have gotten nothing but back of the government's hand - either while service (when their needs and views are pushed aside in favor of ideological  imperatives and social engineering) or afterwards, where their medical treatment is completely ignored. 

To the Dem  elites, veterans either belong on stage as a prop or in a national cemetery.  Concerns about PTSD and health care disappeared once George W. Bush left office. 

Part of this is cultural.  Most Dems view military service as something "other people" do - usually ones who go to church, own firearms and hold outdated traditional views about honor, courage and duty.  In short - idiots.

Oh sure, when they are running for office, they may allude to how they thought about joining - long, long ago, of course, in peacetime - but everyone knows its a lie.

Am I a little bitter?  Perhaps, but it is hard not to be a cynic when one sees the military leadership entirely consumed with imposing massive social experiments and ideological goals to the exclusion of core readiness.  During the 1990s, there was at least the bad excuse that peace seemed eternal and the threat horizon was (falsely) believed to be clear.

Now with wars continuing to sputter and global disorder growing, one ponders what kind of madness causes the government to insist that physical standards be lowering, combat efficiency compromised all so that a handful of women can share the dubious distinction of being abandoned on a foreign battlefield along with the men.  We already know that female veterans are treated just as badly as the male ones by the Veterans Administration. 

Thus the paradox:  Not enough money to sustain our existing force, but plenty to allow female trainees to be endlessly recycled until a few can pass the minimum standards for Ranger training.  When the Marines note that sexually integrated combat units are less effective, they are denounced as heretics.

During the 1990s, this same mentality was put on display with the drive to create female naval aviators.  The product of this effort was Kara Hultgreen.  The resulting tragedy was a loss to everyone involved - and should have demonstrated that the desire to create the "first" of anything can never be allowed to compromise standards.

Still, let us put aside these grim thoughts to once again thank our veterans who serve despite the dangers and unnecessary political burdens placed upon their service.

Unusually for this time of year, the sun is shining in a clear sky.  With any luck, the Eleventh Hour will be dry and somewhat warm.

Houston Voters Reject Liberal Fascism

Liberal Fascism is a term coined by author and commentator Jonah Goldberg and the title of his best-selling book first published in 2008. Progressivism is a synonym, although its adherents would take umbrage at that statement. But ultimately, progressivism leads to tyranny, fiscal calamity, moral depravity, and in some cases, genocide. I will never back down from that belief.

Perhaps the most significant results from Tuesday's elections occurred in the normally liberal big city of Houston, Texas. Houston voters rejected a so-called civil rights initiative that would have allowed transgendered male students into female locker rooms and restrooms. Common sense prevailed.

First, a little context: Houston has sent far-left firebrand U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to Congress for 20 years, and the city has a radical lesbian mayor, Annise Parker. In 2014, Parker issued subpoenas of sermons local preachers planned to give, simply because these ministers opposed an ordinance banning discrimination against lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered (LGBT) people.

As usual, supporters of HERO (Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance) tried to paint opponents as bigots and extremists, when they themselves are the bigots -- against Christianity and Christian's First Amendment rights to practice their beliefs without government intrusion.

Parker was forced to withdraw the subpoenas after a great deal of well-deserved blowback. “We are gratified that the First Amendment rights of the pastors have triumphed over government overreach and intimidation,” said Erik Stanley of the Alliance Defending Freedom of her decision.

On Tuesday, voters rejected the proposed HERO ordinance by a 3-to-2 margin. Apparently, this was a case of NIMBY liberalism (Not in My Back Yard). Progressives typically love to be activists in blogs, on Facebook, TV or on a soap box at an elite college campus. But when a progressive policy will directly impact them, they'll discreetly (and sometimes not so discreetly) oppose it.

But often, as with President Obama and many other leftist Democrats, their ideologies don't negatively impact them. Obama can bash vouchers and suck up to corrupt teachers' unions to his heart's content, as long as his daughters continue attending expensive, exclusive private schools. He and his ilk can rail until the cows come home about the need for much stricter gun control, up to and including confiscation of firearms -- as long as they have armed protection and live in gated communities.

Liberals are two-faced hypocrites, there's no doubt about it. And the people of Houston, many of whom probably are ardent supporters of Congresswoman Jackson-Lee and liberal policies in general, just couldn't stomach the thought of young males being in female restrooms and locker rooms, or playing on female sports teams. As I have written, there are times when even liberals chafe at leftist  policies.

Despite the massive damage President Obama has done to U.S. prestige, our economy, military readiness, our healthcare system and fiscal outlook (not to mention dividing and demoralizing millions), his presidency and its leftist coattails have had one positive result. Since Obama took office, the Republicans increased their margin in the U.S. House, took over the Senate, and claimed many state legislatures. There are now 13 more Republican governors than there were in January 2009.

That kind of legacy might just result in Obama unwittingly spreading the ideology he loathes. Isn't schadenfreude sweet?

Hillary's Headwinds

There is an assumption among the hacks of the mainstream press and their pseudo-scientific sycophants that the presidency is Hillary Clinton's to lose.

Certainly she has the edge in the Democrat primary, however these bald statements ignore several serious obstacles to her succession to the imperial throne.

1.  The Third Term Problem:  It is a natural progression in democracies for the electorate to tire of the same faces and policies and seek to make a change.  After eight years of increasingly autocratic Democrat rule, many who otherwise might be sympathetic to the Dems are looking for someone new and different.  Hillary is about as establishment as one can be and there is absolutely nothing new about her. 

2.  The Classified Email Problem:  Wags insist this scandal is empty but it isn't over and it isn't going away.  The problem for Hillary is that documents aren't classified, information in them is.  By insisting she never sent anything marked, she opens herself up to the charge that she is too clueless to know what a national security secret even looks like, let alone protect it.  This is something a eunuch like Jeb Bush won't bring up but Ted Cruz will.

3.  The Obama Coalition is Collapsing:  The problem with hauling in 95 percent of any ethnic vote is that you can only go down from there.  Put simply, the Democrat Coalition of the Aggrieved is turning on itself - Asians are realizing that they are now "white" and therefore evil and complicit wiht slavery, even though they had nothing to do with it.  The very category of Hispanic is becoming so broad as to be meaningless - Mexicans have nothing in common with Cubans and no one has yet explained why people who came here 30 years ago want to see their kids compete against the latest arrivals.

4.  Gun Control is a Losing Issue:  Despite hammering it at every opportunity, even before the corpses are cold, the policy has never been less popular.  As crime rises (thanks to de-policing and 'lone wolf terrorisim'), suppport for this this policy will erode further.   Hillary's ill-advised temporary embrace of confiscation will ensure that her chances of carrying Obama states like Indiana and North Carolina is zero.  She's also endangering Virginia, Michigan and Ohio.

5.  Events:  The world situation is deteriorating at an alarming rate, and her great selling point is diplomacy.  This makes her answerable to every failure.  As Russian influence expands and their challenges grow, that nonsense with "Reset Button" is going to haunt her.

6.  Things Suck Right Now:  The economy is pathetic, our military is weak and demoralized and young people have no job prospects.  I've noted before that we likely have never left the recession but that the archaic and increasingly detatched-from-reality GDP measures simply won't record it.   Normally an incumbent party seeking additional power runs on a platform of telling everyone how great things are.  Not this year.  To hear the Dems tell it, our colleges are overrun with rape, our economy is a shambles, crime is surging and none of it is their fault.  This is not a good argument to make for continued power.

7.  The Wrath of Obama:  But simply, he doesn't want her to win on a platform of telling everyone that Obama's term has been a mess.  He will end up undermining her at a point when it will do the most damage and leave the smallest paper trail back to him.  I'm not yet sure if there will be an indictment of one of her staffers or a pre-emptive pardon after investigators threaten to resign in protest at the gross violation of federal law.  Either way, the most petulant chief executive in my lifetime will exact some payback for her frequent campaign references about how awful things are.

If you have other reasons, feel free to add them in the comments.