S.E Cupp: I’m Sick Of ‘Cuckservative’ … And Trump Supporters

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Breitbart: CNN pundit S.E Cupp has had enough of Trump fans calling her a “cuckservative.”

Cupp lashed out at the people who criticised her and other conservatives for attending a behind-closed-doors meeting at Facebook’s headquarters earlier this week, to address concerns that the company has a liberal bias. Headlined “Conservatives need Facebook, and Facebook needs us,” Cupp called for more conservative engagement with the social network while attacking Trump supporters for allegedely sowing division within the movement.

Cupp began her article by highlighting some of the abuse she’s received on social media since the meeting:

This week I went to a meeting at Facebook’s headquarters in Menlo Park, California. And then I became a bimbo, a cancer, and a scumbag. Behold Twitter:

Working on the assumption that most of her critics were Trump supporters, Cupp expressed her growing frustration with the presidential candidate’s loudest fans. In particular, she critiqued their use of the word “cuckservative” and their willingness to attack others in the movement.

Questioning the Trump orthodoxy (which, incidentally, is rarely intelligible if ever at all conservative) is the thing that now makes a conservative a “cuckservative,” a pejorative term to describe a weak, emasculated “sell out” to the establishment wing of the party. This now includes conservatives like me, with previously pristine records of right-wing fanaticism, at least as classified by the mainstream press, and ranging from Glenn Beck to the National Review, Ted Cruz to Paul Ryan.

Posted in Conservatives | Comments Off on S.E Cupp: I’m Sick Of ‘Cuckservative’ … And Trump Supporters

The Disease Of Underearning

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Lecture 68 with Geoff from CA:

When I came into Underearners Anonymous, all I knew was that I didn’t have any money and I didn’t feel comfortable asking for money.

I learned that underearning is a disease that goes back to childhood. I grew up in an alcoholic home. In that environment, I got wounded. I was a wounded animal. I didn’t realize I got wounded. I got into a great college. I got great grades. As I got older, the things that worked for me in childhood, how I managed my environment, no longer worked, so that by the time I was in my 30s, I had a small life. I couldn’t build a career and I couldn’t have a relationship.

Underearning is cave-dwelling. Growing up in a household, we developed a wound and became scared to get out into the world with the other healthy animals, so I retreated into the cave. I feared playing with the healthy animals in case I got hurt or killed. The problem with living a small life is that it is unfulfilling. Recovery is uncovering those wounds and healing those wounds.

When I recover, I can step out into the world and become more visible.

How this disease manifested in my life was a sapping of vitality in pursuing my vision.

As I got older, I saw friends getting married, I saw friends getting promotions, and I couldn’t seem to get off the ground. I’ve come to realize this is not my fault. I had this weird patterns that would not permit me to tap the energy in my life.

I moved to Los Angeles to become a writer. In the beginning, I did OK. I would attract toxic bosses. I would attract in toxic work situations. I got an agent who wouldn’t work for me. I was always sabotaging myself. I sold a movie script for all this money and at the same time, I got into a dysfunctional relationship and it took my attention off my writing and getting bigger with my career. I was scared to get bigger. Every time I had an opportunity to get bigger, somehow it didn’t work out. My life kept getting smaller. In my 30s, I had $37 in my bank account and I was two months late on my rent and I didn’t know what to do.

My Al Anon sponsor told me about DA (Debtors Anonymous). I didn’t really click with the symptoms of DA. I was an under-earner. I lived in extreme deprivation. I started hearing about under-earning. Underearners Anonymous had a share day in Los Angeles. I learned that this disease was about time and an inability to build a life.

Some people can take the right steps to get bigger. They can market and get bigger and I couldn’t do that. The symptoms of underearning really connected with me.

1. Time Indifference – We put off what must be done and do not use our time to support our own vision and further our own goals.

2. Idea Deflection –We compulsively reject ideas that could expand our lives or careers, and increase our profitability.

3. Compulsive Need to Prove – Although we have demonstrated competence in our jobs or business, we are driven by a need to re-prove our worth and value.

4. Clinging to Useless Possessions – We hold onto possessions that no longer serve our needs, such as threadbare clothing or broken appliances.

5. Exertion/Exhaustion – We habitually overwork, become exhausted, then under-work or cease work completely.

6. Giving Away Our Time – We compulsively volunteer for various causes, or give away our services without charge, when there is no clear benefit.

7. Undervaluing and Under-pricing – We undervalue our abilities and services and fear asking for increases in compensation or for what the market will bear.

8. Isolation – We choose to work alone when it might serve us much better to have co-workers, associates, or employees.

9. Physical Ailments – Sometimes, out of fear of being larger or exposed, we experience physical ailments.

10. Misplaced Guilt or Shame – We feel uneasy when asking for or being given what we need or what we are owed.

11. Not Following Up – We do not follow up on opportunities, leads, or jobs that could be profitable. We begin many projects and tasks but often do not complete them.

12. Stability Boredom – We create unnecessary conflict with co-workers, supervisors and clients, generating problems that result in financial distress.

It was suggested to me that I read the symptoms to a friend and share on them. I did that. Every one resonated. Especially time indifference and isolation.

Nothing really changed…until I got a sponsor and worked the steps. I realized this was life and death. I started going to the 5:30 am meeting on the main phone line. That meeting is my rock.

The Tools are wonderful unless I really work the 12 Steps, unless I can establish a spiritual foundation and look at all of my fears and resentments.

1. Time Recording – We must be conscious of how we spend our time. We keep a written record to increase awareness and support our focus on goals and the actions required to achieve them.

2. Meetings – We attend UA meetings regularly to share our experience, strength, and hope in order to help ourselves and others recover from underearning.

3. Sponsorship – We actively seek sponsorship with someone who has worked the Twelve Steps in UA and is willing to guide us in our recovery.

4. Possession Consciousness – We routinely discard what no longer serves us in order to foster a belief that life is plentiful and that we will be able to provide ourselves with what we need.

5. Service – Giving service is vital to our recovery. It is through service to others, and to the Fellowship, that we keep what has been so generously given to us.

6. Goals Pages – We set goals for all aspects of our lives, write them down, measure our progress and reward achievement.

7. Action Meetings – We organize action meetings with other UA members to discuss our earning concerns and to generate actions that will bring more prosperity into our lives.

8. Action Partner – We connect regularly with action partners regarding earning concerns in order to provide each other with accountability, continuity, and support.

9. Solvency – We do not debt one day at a time. Debting leads to underearning.

10. Communication – We contact other UA members to seek support, to diminish isolation, and to reinforce our commitments to action.

11. Literature – We read Twelve-Step literature to strengthen our understanding of compulsive disease and the process of recovery.

12. Savings – Saving money demonstrates faith in the future and acceptance of the fact that money is a tool vital to our prosperous vision. We create and follow a savings plan on whatever scale we are able.

It’s not what I can take from life but what I can put into life. Before the program, my life was about looking good.

When I get scared, I need to throw myself deeper into the program and put in more service.

I was spending my time in traffic and I had no energy to pursue my vision.

You don’t have goals, you just want to get rid of the pain for today.

I rented a room in Glendale. I had a mattress on the floor. My printer on the floor. Mismatched lamps. No furniture. My landlord has thrown out the mattress and I had taken it from the garbage and there was a coil sticking out of the mattress and it was scrape against my thigh and I would wake up bleeding.

My life looks very different. I got a job. It came from an action meeting. I told my action partner what I wanted to make in a month and he said [looking at what was being earned in various odd jobs], you need a job. I wouldn’t have come up with that on my own.

I need all of this program. I need the tools.

They call underearning a disease of confusion. I use the time sheets to map out my week. I don’t just fritter my time away.

I wanted my time to be more conscious. They say in UA that if you are recording your time, you’re doing it right.

I’m bringing people into my recovery. I’m 35 yo and I have it in my head that the period in which I was supposed to make it as a writer is over and it is too embarrassing to market myself and try to reconnect with alumni, but if I bring people into my recovery, and say I have no artistic community, and a woman in my action group said you can make five outreach calls.

My to-do list doesn’t come from me. It comes from people outside of me who have a better grasp on it.

I heard in a workshop that as underearners, we lack the tools to navigate our lives and to take the right steps. We bring other people into our recovery to get the ship out of the port. I have a sponsor and action partners and an action group.

Posted in Addiction | Comments Off on The Disease Of Underearning

What’s With All The Blacks Named ‘Dante’?

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes: “First names that begin with D are kind of a black pride thing these days, kind of like certain first names that begin with J are a Jewish pride thing lately (e.g., Joshua). “Dante” is a good choice for black parents who want to signal black pride to other blacks via a D name without sounding ghetto (Dantevious, however …). The cultural connotations of “Dante” are as classy as possible.”

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on What’s With All The Blacks Named ‘Dante’?

From Desegregation To Disinformation: The Decline Of The Virginian-Pilot

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

From 2012: As a local newsman, I have been particularly interested in the Virginian-Pilot’s now-notorious attempt to suppress the story of a black mob’s beating two members of its own staff, Dave Forster and Marjon Rostami.

As I argued here almost exactly three years ago, this sort of thing usually arises from the characteristic culture of the American newsroom. No marching orders to manipulate facts need be given. The newsroom worldview literally inoculates reporters and editors against ideas that might cause them to question the typical Main Stream Media narrative.

But I now must add this proviso: While the leftist worldview  drives  most news coverage in concept, and most reporters and editors do not consciously insert bias into most stories, in some cases, by omission or commission, they flat out lie.

Nothing else explains what occurred, for instance, in NBC’s editing of the audio tapes of George Zimmerman’s call to police the night he shot Trayvon Martin in self defense.

And nothing else explains why the Pilot buried the story.

Thus, for example the Pilot’s Editor, Denis Finley (email him), said in his memo to the staff trying to explain away his behavior:

Based on the facts, this story did not cross the bar to be published because as a general rule, The Pilot doesn`t publish stories about simple assaults. …

We have done our due diligence with the story. We have checked the police reports. I have read them. We have checked to see whether there is an inordinate amount of crime in the neighborhood where the attack happened. There is not.

 Pilot stands by handling of attack on staff members May 3, 2012

But the comment thread on Finley’s showed that his readers knew perfectly well that Finley was lying and had no difficulty proving it. One commenter noted that the newspaper’s job was to find out whether it was a “simple assault” and whether it was a racial attack. [Do your job! Submitted by JayDough May 9, 2012] Another exploded that Finley’s claim about the neighborhood:

“From WAVY.com`s story about the incident, ‘WAVY.com, using data from crimemapping.com, looked into how many crimes are reported in the area of the April 14 assault. A report for the week of April 8 until April 14 shows 49 crimes were reported within a one mile radius of the reported assault.’”[Disappointing Editor Submitted by ozzy4sure on May 4, 2012]

 

Anyone who has worked in a newsroom knows that a mob beating of any two people, reporters or not, is news. Had a group of whites attacked two black reporters leaving an all-white “enclave,” as the media like to describe white neighborhoods, you can bet the story would have been on the front page. The Pilot would have been beside itself with rage.

That leaves the question of why an editorial writer broke the news in an opinion column. [A beating at Church and Brambleton,  By Michelle Washington, The Virginian-Pilot,  May 1, 2012] My guess: after holding the story for two weeks, the newspaper couldn’t report the attack as news. And perhaps the news staff, knowing the attack was no “simple assault,” rebelled against the newspaper’s editorial bureaucrats. Yet if what Finley claimed was true—that the crime was not racial and really was a simple assault—then he is left with the problem explain why he permitted a columnist to write about it at all.

Given the Virginian-Pilot’s history, a lie on behalf of the city’s angry black majority would be no surprise. The longtime owner of the paper, Frank Batten Sr., was a staunch desegregationist at a time when such an editorial position was quite unpopular in Virginia. It won a Pulitzer Prize  for its editorials on the subject.

Batten created a media empire that turned into Landmark Media Enterprises. He founded The Weather Channel.

But don’t expect the Pilot to report on the black storm raging across America in such fronts as the knock-down game, Polar bear hunting, and flash mobs, all of which involve a beating at best or a murder at worst.

The Virginian Pilot’s editorial about this scandal said the crime means “Norfolk needs a civil conversation.” After several paragraphs uncivilly suggesting that readers unhappy with the coverage are racists, it concluded that no one really knows what happened or motivated the crimes and then sallied forth with this idiocy: “Race doesn’t define us. It doesn’t define who we are.”

Tell that to Al or Jesse and those, like Spike Lee, who wanted George Zimmerman strung up from a lamppost without a trial.

Many years ago, the late newsmen Peter Jennings and Mike Wallace declared that they would not, in covering a war, alert American GIs to an enemy ambush. They were reporters first, they said, and Americans second.  

One wonders if their contemporary counterparts would warn an elderly white couple if a black flash mob was about to attack.  

We already know they wouldn’t report it.

Posted in Blacks, Journalism | Comments Off on From Desegregation To Disinformation: The Decline Of The Virginian-Pilot

A Possible Alliance Between Nazis & Social Justice Warriors

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Any nation that turns against achievement in the name of equality is likely to be bad for the Jews.

This is something that social justice warriors and the Alt Right have in common — they oppose achievement by merit. They prefer a rigged playing field.

The best definition of the political right is that is against equality. Instead, the right recognizes and respects hierarchy.

Every people have distinct gifts. Ashkenazi Jews, for instance, have the gift of high IQ and high achievement and high educational and status attainment.

Occupy Wall Street, with its rhetoric against the 1% who rig the game, made Jews understandably nervous. It was not in their interests.

Even though Jews vote left in America, they tend to be against affirmative action and for law and order.

The more free a society, the more likely it is that Jews will dominate certain high IQ fields such as medicine, science, law, media, technology, and business. Any group, particularly tribal groups, that comes to dominate a society can be expected to use their power primarily for its own benefit. Non-Jews have rational reasons to be concerned about Jewish power just as Jews have rational reasons to be concerned about gentile power and force.

In Western Europe, Jews generally admired their gentile societies while in Eastern Europe, Jews and goyim tended to hate each other. Thus Jews from Western European origins tend to have a more positive view of goyim than do Jews of Eastern European origins.

Jews from Europe now living in Israel, by contrast, have had a more benign view of Arabs than have Jews from Arab and Muslim lands. You are much more likely to hear chants of “Death to the Arabs” from Sephardim than Ashkenazim. Rabbi Meir Kahane’s support in Israel came largely from the Sephardim who had much more experience with Arabs than did the Ashkenazim.

Posted in Jews, Nazi | Comments Off on A Possible Alliance Between Nazis & Social Justice Warriors

Trump Supporters Vs. the ‘Renegade Jew

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Why is it morally reprehensible to call somebody a “renegade Jew”?

If that is morally reprehensible, what is rape and murder? Really morally reprehensible?

Tabletmag’s ratio of nonsense to quality is about two to one. Surely many Jews, not just me, tire of this hysteria about Donald Trump.

Just as women have survived for millennia by learning how to maneuver those who are bigger and stronger than them, so too Jews have survived for millennia by their wiles.

One quality I enjoy about Jews is their emotional openness. They’re passionate about life. Sometimes, though, this heart-on-the-sleeve attitude has a dark side.

Armin Rosen writes:

Let’s give credit where it’s due: As far as troll-baiting headlines go, “Renegade Jew” is pretty excellent—and yes, morally reprehensible, too.

David Horowitz’s attack on William Kristol on Breitbart.com, in a piece called “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew,” is a jambalaya of tedious media self-references if you excise the “renegade Jew” bit: A right-wing figure attacks a second, more prominent right-wing figure on an alt-right website—you’re asleep already, aren’t you? But when served with a pithy, two-word epithet and a frisson of the world’s oldest hatred—Jew hatred, that is—a hit piece on the editor of The Weekly Standard is enough to foment a trending topic on Twitter. It spawned an unintentionally lyrical turn of phrase that seems destined for ironic re-appropriation.

In context, “renegade Jew” was clearly intended as a blunt ethnic slur, and had apparently little to do with the substance of Horowitz’s loopy and disorganized attacks on Kristol, who is notably anti-Trump. The story, which pilloried the “renegade” Kristol for reportedly organizing a third-party conservative challenger to Trump and Hillary Clinton, included a lengthy digression about Mike Tyson’s autobiography, and a series of bizarre asides about a phantom U.S. intervention in Egypt which did not in fact occur, at least not in real life as the majority of the non-David Horowitz community understands it.

The logic of the “renegade Jew” headline becomes clear only in the piece’s final paragraph. “I am a Jew who has never been to Israel and has never been a Zionist in the sense of believing that Jews can rid themselves of Jew hatred by having their own nation state,” Horowitz (who also wrote his own headline) felt it necessary to state. “I am also an American (and an American first), whose country is threatened with destruction by the same enemies” as Israel, he continues, specifically “Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, ISIS, and Hamas.”

To weaken the only party that stands between the Jews and their annihilation, and between America and the forces intent on destroying her, is a political miscalculation so great and a betrayal so profound as to not be easily forgiven.

I’m a Jew, Horowitz writes, but not the double-dealing, Israel-visiting, non-America firster type of Jew, a category into which some percentage of Jews—few of them Trump-supporting, one can assume—implicitly fall.

That final paragraph is an artless machine gun spray of ethno-religious insinuation, and as fundamentally uninteresting as any other bigoted wheeze. But coming from David Horowitz, “renegade Jew” is also a notable milestone in an anguished political journey, one that’s made a distinct impression on American political discourse and thus takes on a special significance in such Trumpian times as these.

Horowitz began his career as the radical leftist son of pro-Stalinist parents. He participated in the anti-war movement, helped to found In These Times, edited Ramparts magazine, and become personal friends with Huey Newtown. The murder one of Horowitz’s friends at the hands of her fellow Black Panther Party members in the mid-70s shocked Horowitz into one of the iconic ideological conversions in late-20th century American politics. Horowitz’s 1996 memoir Radical Son became a landmark chronicle of American political culture’s disillusionment with New Left utopianism, and as Akiva Gottleib noted in a remarkable 2012 profile of Horowitz for Tablet (the opening line of which is: “The first thing that David Horowitz wanted me to know was that he rarely leaves the house anymore”), Horowitz’s 2000 pamphlet “The Art of Political War” was admired by Karl Rove and endorsed by dozens of Republican state party chairmen.

In Gottlieb’s telling, Horowitz, who had gained notoriety for organizing Islamofascism Awareness Weeks on college campuses in the late 2000s, had transposed a radical leftist’s teleological urgency—he “has spent the past quarter-century in a mode of permanent apocalypse,” Gottlieb writes—onto an opposite ideology and an opposite political sensibility. Horowitz’s allies on the right had not repaid his passion for propaganda, or appreciated his bracing moral clarity. “In 2012, his books are not just ignored by The New York Times, but by The Weekly Standard and National Review,” writes Gottlieb. “There are plenty of conservatives who don’t like my manner,” Horowitz said. “It’s too aggressive, too Jewish, too leftist.”

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Trump Supporters Vs. the ‘Renegade Jew

THE TOP FIVE MOST HILARIOUS ANTI-SEMITIC CONSPIRACY THEORIES

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

How about compiling a list of the most hilarious misconceptions Jews have of non-Jews? Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories aren’t inherently most hilarious than Jewish anti-gentile theories.

All in-groups have misconceptions of out-groups. Anti-Semites are not special.

I come from Australia. Australians tend to have a low opinion of everyone who is not Australian and they have some ridiculous notions about America. So too many Americans have silly notions about Australia.

I’m a convert to Orthodox Judaism. Many non-Jews I grew up with have ludicrous conceptions of Orthodox Judaism just as Orthodox Jews have many ludicrous conceptions of Christianity.

Yair Rosenberg writes: Last week, the British Labour party suspended Musabbir Ali, a former campaign official, for making anti-Semitic statements on social media. He joined an ignominious cast of characters punished for similar offenses, including a former mayor of London and a current parliament member. But Ali distinguished himself with his particularly creative brand of anti-Semitism.

On Twitter, among other bigoted bromides, he shared a link to a post claiming that the Jews had “financed Oliver Cromwell’s overthrowing and beheading of Stuart King Charles I after he refused them control of England’s finances.” This extraordinary assertion overlooked one minor detail: Jews were expelled from England in 1290 and could not legally return until 1657, years after Cromwell came to power.

Ali’s ahistorical absurdity highlighted an underappreciated aspect of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories: In addition to being hateful and ignorant, they are often hilarious.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on THE TOP FIVE MOST HILARIOUS ANTI-SEMITIC CONSPIRACY THEORIES

Trump Supporters Unleash Anti-Semitic Tweets at NY Times Editor

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Such delicate sensitive souls all shocked and horrified by the hate.

If you love good, you hate evil. If you love your people, you hate their enemies. That’s how the world works.

A Torah Jew does not pay attention to such things as racism and bigotry. He doesn’t worry about anti-Semitism.

I’m probably a bad person for saying this, but I’m kinda glad that few people are paying attention to the bigotry slur anymore.

I love how the following story ends, congratulating Weisman for stepping away from his Twitter experiment before he loses his mind. Since when has confronting people who hate you a likely cause of insanity? Only if you are a delicate flower.

Looking at these tweets, it is easy to think that the enemies of the Jews are morons. That would be a mistake. White nationalists have messages for people at different IQ levels.

(JTA) — New York Times editor Jonathan Weisman is clearly familiar with the anti-Semitism of some Donald Trump supporters in the Twittersphere. So maybe he shouldn’t be surprised by the reaction to his own tweet calling them out for it.

But it’s hard not to be a little shocked.

On Thursday, Weisman referred to Trump’s wavering renunciation of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke back in February, Melania Trump’s justification of the anti-Semitism unleashed on reporter Julia Ioffe for her GQ profile of the would-be first lady last week and Sheldon Adelson’s recent appeal for Republican Jewish leaders to support the presumptive GOP nominee for president — all in less than 140 characters.

.

Weisman’s tweet caught the eye of “Cyber Trump,” who proceeded to bait the Washington, D.C.-based Jewish journalist into a response.

After the exchange made waves in the Twitterverse, the anti-Semitic deluge only got far, far worse. Weisman retweeted the responses.

Some took notice and attempted to throw Weisman a life preserver.

But Weisman ultimately had to check out, presumably lest he go off the deep end.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on Trump Supporters Unleash Anti-Semitic Tweets at NY Times Editor

Why Is the Anti-Defamation League Calling Out Donald Trump by Name?

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

What a bunch of crybabies. Since when is calling somebody a “renegade Jew” a hateful act?

Nathan Guttman writes: WASHINGTON — Even as leaders of the Anti-Defamation League gathered in the nation’s capital on May 16 for their annual meeting, hateful campaign rhetoric kept piling up in the presidential race.

In the latest incident, David Horowitz, a columnist for the right-wing news site Breitbart.com, denounced Bill Kristol, an anti-Donald Trump Jewish Republican, as a
“renegade Jew.”
A week earlier, Trump’s presidential campaign sought to appoint a white supremacist leader
as a delegate to the Republican convention. Shortly before that, a Jewish journalist was bombarded with anti-Semitic attacks and threats
on social media after she published an unflattering profile of Trump’s wife, Melania Trump.

In a way, it’s been ADL’s moment: What better group to take the bull by the horns than the organization set up to confront exactly the kind of perceived bigotry that Trump and his supporters are promoting?

“Here at ADL we haven’t seen this kind of kind of mainstreaming of intolerance at this level” for decades, said the group’s national director Jonathan Greenblatt in a May 16 interview. Trump’s comments about Muslims and Latinos, his refusal to disavow racist supporters, and his belated action against such supporters, said Greenblatt, was reminiscent of the campaign of southern segregationist George Wallace’s in 1968 and to Pat Buchanan’s angry, racially tinged 1992 campaign. “But to make these policies core to a candidate’s platform, that is new and its troubling and we think it’s a very worrying trend,” Greenblatt said.

During the course of this campaign season, other Jewish groups that share a commitment to combating racism have sought to address what they view as an epic eruption of hateful rhetoric. But for the most part, they have done so while seeking to avoid calling out by name the presidential candidates they hold responsible.

In contrast, ADL, which has undergone a leadership transition this year, has entered the political fray combatively to take on Trump and some of his political supporters over their rhetoric. ADL also issued statements against Ted Cruz for his call to patrol Muslim neighborhoods and against Democrat Bernie Sanders, who made inaccurate statements on Israel’s actions against Palestinians in Gaza. ADL has, in fact, become the leading group in the organized Jewish world in speaking out against intolerance in the political campaign.

But most of the group’s attention has been focused on Trump, his associates, and supporters of his campaign. Over the past six months, ADL has issued at least five public statements or press releases singling out the New York real estate mogul for his positions, conduct or rhetoric.

Posted in ADL | Comments Off on Why Is the Anti-Defamation League Calling Out Donald Trump by Name?

Out on a Limb with Hillary

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Mickey Kaus writes: T.A. Frank, who wrote an eloquent piece criticizing the Gang of 8 bill (mainly from the left) for The New Republic, notes that Hillary’s Hispander war with Sanders has left her waaay out of even the turbulent mainstream on immigration –– she seems to have basically promised not to deport anybody except those who’ve committed violent offenses or drug crimes:

[U]nder Clinton’s policy, if you manage to sneak across the border illegally and make it into a city, you won’t be removed. You could call that open borders, except it’s messier. It’s more like a free-for-all …

I suppose the question is whether Clinton squirms back to a less extreme promise before Trump clobbers her with her current position …

P.S.: When I reread Frank’s 2013 TNR piece, I noticed this eloquent, on point paragraph — worth reprinting because it shows that worry about uncontrolled immigration isn’t really a “right-wing” concern:

The country I want for myself and future Americans is one that’s prosperous, cohesive, harmonious, wealthy in land and resources per capita, nurturing of its skilled citizens, and, most important, protective of its unskilled citizens, who deserve as much any other Americans to live in dignity. This bill threatens to put all of that out of reach, because it fails to control illegal immigration.

No place for that in Hillary’s campaign?

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Out on a Limb with Hillary