пятница, 30 ноября 2018 г.

Is there an answer to the problem of identity politics in America? For some, the “solution” is direct.

“We need to take on the oppression narrative,” conservative commentator Heather Mac Donald said at a Heritage Foundation gathering on Capitol Hill.

Americans need to “rebut” the idea “that every difference in American society today is the result by definition of discrimination,” Mac Donald said during the event Monday, called “Identity Politics Is a Threat to Society. Is There Anything We Can Do About It at This Point?

Without challenging this overarching narrative, the Manhattan Institute fellow said, “there is going to be no end to identity politics.”

The rise of identity politics has become a phenomenon not just in America, but in the West in general.

In many ways, debates over identity are defining and shaping the politics of our time and pose a unique challenge in particular to the United States, a vast, multi-ethnic country with potential identity fault lines that far exceed the more homogenous societies of the world.

Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and Mike Franc, director of D.C. programs at the Hoover Institution, brought together a diverse set of thinkers to hash out why identity politics is on the rise and how to address it.

Besides Mac Donald, they included John Fonte, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute; Peter Berkowitz, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution; Michael Lind, a visiting professor at the University of Texas at Austin; and Andrew Sullivan, a writer for New York magazine.

Each highlighted the problem.

Hudson’s Fonte outlined what has become the framework for identity politics on the left.

“Multiculturalism, the diversity project, and critical theory” are the three major cornerstones of this creed, Fonte said.

In a 2013 article in National Review, Fonte described the “diversity project” as: “[T]he ongoing effort to use federal power to impose proportional representation along race, gender, and ethnic lines in all aspects of American life.”

Multiculturalism comes in a hard version and a soft version, he said.

The soft version celebrates ethnic subcultures, examples being St. Patrick’s Day and Cinco de Mayo.

The hard version, Fonte said, has damaged society. He concisely summed up its tenets:

The United States is a multicultural society in which different cultures—African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, Native Americans, and women—have their own values, histories, and identities separate from and sometimes in opposition to dominant Anglo, white, male culture.

This creed divides America into many peoples and has become the dominant ethos taught in American schools.

The diversity project’s demand for statistical equality for groups, or “group proportionalism,” as Fonte calls it, is another integral element of identity politics. But taken to its logical extent, the diversity project is incompatible with a free society, he said.

There is simply no way to create perfect, equal representation of all groups in all fields, the Hudson Institute scholar said. Any attempt to do so would require state coercion on a massive scale.

Finally, Fonte said, critical theory—which explains the difference in group outcomes by classifying groups as privileged or marginalized—further undermines free society because it directly opposes the concept of “liberal, democratic jurisprudence.” Individual justice is subordinated to social justice—the oppressors and the oppressed.

These concepts fundamentally undermine our republic, Fonte said, and while he had no answer to solve the threat, he said a return to patriotism and national identity was a better way forward.

Hoover’s Berkowitz reiterated the obsession of identity politics with “race, class, and gender.”

These classifications become the essence of who a person is, and subordinate individual differences and individual justice.

“Group rights are distributed on the basis of the discrimination or oppression that the group to which you belong has suffered,” Berkowitz said.

Thus, he said, victimhood becomes a “virtue” and a moral status symbol demonstrating that one deserves greater political power.

Distinctions exist between the postmodernist ideologies of the 1980s and 1990s and the early 21st century, he said. A key feature defining the identity politics of today is that it has moved on from the relativism of earlier eras and become dogmatic in its certainties.

Identity politics adherents on the left, for example, are now certain in their assessment that the West—including America—is racist and sexist.

Dissent from this narrative is taken as “an act of violence, an expression of racism and hatred,” Berkowitz said.

These ideas not only have become dominant on college campuses, he said, but are a threat to the fundamental nature of liberal societies. They cannot coexist with concepts like free speech, due process, and limited government.

American universities won’t counteract the identity politics creed, Berkowitz said, and so Americans who oppose it need to find outside solutions if they want to preserve their free society.

Berkowitz, who has written extensively about restoring the value of liberal education, said such solutions may come through alternative paths to education at the K-12 level—homeschooling and charter schools—as well as more programs to provide alternative curricula to parents and young people.

Lind spoke about how identity politics is becoming a flashpoint for the most fundamental divides not only in the U.S., but throughout the West.

Half of America—mostly in the rural regions and exurbs—accepts and lives out the concept of the “melting pot,” while the other half—in urban environments—embraces and lives with predominant multiculturalism, Lind said.

This city vs. country divide sets this era apart from earlier ones where region was more of a factor.

For most of American history, the concept of the melting pot has worked, but Lind said he is pessimistic for its future because of demography.

“The native fertility rate in Western societies is below replacement … we need to have replacement immigration of some kind in order to prevent the population from just collapsing,” Lind said.

However, the continually low birth rates in these societies will put pressure on them to increase immigration, he said, and so feed the constant political base for multiculturalism.

Mac Donald, also a contributor to City Journal, said people of “courage” need to confront the ideology of identity politics directly for the sake of the nation’s future.

She summed up what she said is the crux of of the debate and the oppression narrative:

The main driver is race—women are sort of a fast second place—but the main driver of all this is the lingering racial disparities, and we both need to close them and be honest about what’s driving them.

I would say family breakdown is the biggest driver and other behavioral disparities and culture [are also drivers]. Those need to be closed because if not, the oppression narrative is going to be with us to our enormous misfortune.

Sullivan said that while identity politics has existed in the past—notably in the 1990s—it’s “different now.”

People debated the concepts of identity politics in earlier eras, and often vehemently opposed them, but now identity politics has taken over “all teaching in the humanities” and has been fully embraced by an entire generation of “the elite,” the writer said.

Sullivan, an early supporter of same-sex marriage and President Barack Obama, said that it’s “staggering” how the ideas of identity politics have been universally accepted by the young elite, without question.

These ideas have spread beyond the college campus, Sullivan wrote earlier this year, and entered the mainstream of debate in America.

“It is staggering how people under the age of 30 buy all of this, have never even regarded it as questionable, that it’s become completely routine to believe these things,” Sullivan said.

Sullivan attributed this, in part, to parenting.

Parents tried so hard to create safe spaces for their children, he said, that the children were simply unable to handle disagreement or anything that made them feel unsafe.

Sullivan also said social media fuels surface-level hot takes and “virtue signaling,” rather than deeper thought.

What’s remarkable, he said, is that identity victimhood politics comes at a time when many of these groups are thriving more than ever before in history.

“We should talk about the successes that have occurred without this stuff,” Sullivan said. “In fact, I sometimes wonder whether this stuff is a function of having succeeded, because you’re terrified you’re going to lose the struggle you always lived with and you have nothing to do with your life.”

The post Here’s Why Identity Politics Threaten America appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2KI6DDW
via IFTTT

Twitter reinstated Houston-based conservative radio host and contributor Jesse Kelly’s account Tuesday after Sen.-elect Josh Hawley, R-Mo., called for a congressional investigation of the tech giant.

“The account was temporarily suspended for violating the Twitter Rules and has been reinstated,” a Twitter spokesperson told The Hill, adding: “We have communicated directly with the account owner.”

Iraq War veteran Kelly, 37, said that before Twitter suspended his account on Sunday, he was consciously attempting to avoid violating its rules.

“The truth is, I understand how sensitive Twitter is. I understand that they are run by leftists, and they’re trying to run off people on the right, so knowing that, I’m fairly careful with it,” Kelly told Hill.TV’s Buck Sexton.

“Especially because it was a big tool I used to promote my show, to promote things that I had written,” he said. “So I wasn’t trying to get kicked off, I was trying to be good, and I got kicked off anyway.”

Kelly, who ran two unsuccessful campaigns for Congress in Arizona in 2010 and 2012, shared a message he received from Twitter Support with author Sean Parnell upon Kelly’s suspension, which claimed his account had been permanently suspended “due to multiple or repeat violations of the rules.” The message indicated that Twitter would not restore his account or consider any appeals:

“When we permanently suspend an account, we notify people that they have been suspended for abuse violations, and explain which policy or policies they have violated and which content was in violation,” Twitter says on its “range of enforcement options” webpage.

The message Kelly received from Twitter did not list any violations or offending content.

Hawley, 38, called on Congress Tuesday to launch an investigation of Twitter concerning the incident, implying Twitter was discriminating against conservative commentators in its bans, and questioning the company’s status as a nonliable publisher.

Hawley alluded to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in his tweet, which does not hold online companies legally responsible for the speech they host or republish.

“No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider,” the law reads.

Kelly told Hill.TV that the tech giant is a publisher rather than a platform.

“They’re clearly a publisher, and they want to be treated under the law like a platform, but a platform is simply an open forum where people, as long as they’re not promoting violence, can post whatever they want to post. That’s clearly not the case,” he said.

Twitter lists permanent suspensions as its “most severe enforcement action,” although permanently suspended users have the option of appealing if they believe the suspension was made in error.

Kelly’s ban quickly caught the interest of other high-profile political figures. Sen. Ben Sasse, R.-Neb., expressed concern over what he said is a larger trend in American society of silencing free speech.

Upon hearing of Kelly’s return to Twitter, Hawley again reiterated his demand for Congress to investigate the matter, calling for Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to testify in front of lawmakers, under oath.

Hawley, who currently serves as the attorney general for the state of Missouri, was an intern at The Heritage Foundation through its Young leaders Program in the summer of 2000.

The post Twitter Restores Conservative Pundit Jesse Kelly’s Account, Denies It Was a Permanent Ban appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2KI4Crm
via IFTTT

President Donald Trump doubled down on disagreements with dire predictions made in the latest U.S. government global warming report.

“One of the problems that a lot of people like myself, we have very high levels of intelligence but we’re not necessarily such believers,” Trump told The Washington Post in an Oval Office interview Tuesday.

“As to whether or not it’s man-made and whether or not the effects that you’re talking about are there, I don’t see it,” Trump said when the Post asked why he was skeptical of claims made in the latest National Climate Assessment released Friday.

The NCA, which is mandated by a 1990 law, issued dire warnings about future global warming’s potential effects on public health, ecosystems, and the economy. The report generated alarming media headlines of impending catastrophe if nothing is done to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

The report claims “climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century.”

However, critics pointed out the report relies heavily on an “exceptionally unlikely” worst-case scenario that projects 4 degrees Celsius of warming by the end of the century.

Trump echoed those criticisms, including disagreeing that global warming would substantially impact the U.S. economy.

“I don’t believe it,” Trump said on Monday when reporters asked about the NCA’s economic predictions.

Trump doubled-down on disagreements with the NCA’s projections, and the president also talked about global pollution problems.

“You look at our air and our water and it’s right now at a record clean,” Trump said. “But when you look at China and you look at parts of Asia and you look at South America, and when you look at many other places in this world, including Russia, including many other places, the air is incredibly dirty, and when you’re talking about an atmosphere, oceans are very small.”

“And it blows over and it sails over. I mean we take thousands of tons of garbage off our beaches all the time that comes over from Asia,” Trump continued. “It just flows right down the Pacific. It flows and we say, ‘Where does this come from?’ And it takes many people, to start off with.”

Trump also pointed to the “global cooling” scare of the 1970s as a reason he’s skeptical of global warming predictions.

“If you go back and if you look at articles, they talk about global freezing,” Trump said. “They talk about at some point, the planet is going to freeze to death, then it’s going to die of heat exhaustion.”

The Post suggested Trump may be referring to an “oft-cited 1975 Newsweek article titled ‘The Cooling World’ or a 1974 Time magazine story titled ‘Another Ice Age?’”

“But researchers who have reviewed this period have found that while such ideas were indeed afoot at the time, there was ‘no scientific consensus in the 1970s’ about a global cooling trend or risk, as there is today about human-caused climate change,” the Post reported.

However, many newspapers, including The New York Times, reported on the global cooling frenzy in the 1970s, not just Newsweek and Time. Scientists wrote to President Richard Nixon to warn of global cooling, and even the CIA prepared a report on the risks of global cooling.

The CIA’s 1974 report warned that continued cooling, as many scientists predicted, would “create worldwide agricultural failures in the 1970s.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post ‘I Don’t See It’: Trump Doubles Down on Global Warming Skepticism appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2DSJpto
via IFTTT

First lady Melania Trump welcomed media attention to how the administration is confronting the opioid drug crisis during her appearance Wednesday at a “town hall” on the subject at Liberty University.

That would be a change of approach, she said.

I would like that they’re focused more on what we’re doing, and what we want to achieve, and spread awareness. It’s very important for the country and the whole world,” the first lady said of the news media.

Political commentator Eric Bolling, host of CRTV’s “America,” invited Trump to the town hall discussion, which also featured Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar.

Pop singer Demi Lovato’s mother, Dianna De La Garza, was scheduled to appear but had to cancel. Lovato nearly died from an opioid overdose in July.

Family tragedy prompted Bolling to raise awareness of the opioid crisis and to look for solutions after his 19-year-old son Eric Chase died in September 2017 from an accidental overdose of Xanax laced with fentanyl.

“The fight against opioid deaths in America just took a turn for the better,” Bolling told The Daily Signal before the town hall. “There is no doubt in my mind that first lady Melania Trump joining me in this war on the deadliest health crisis to ever hit the United States will have a significant and positive effect.”

In a statement provided to The Daily Signal, the first lady’s communications director, Stephanie Grisham, said of Bolling:

The first lady has been inspired by his commitment to combating the opioid epidemic. To use his own personal family tragedy to help save lives is the epitome of strength and selflessness

Here are five big moments from Trump’s appearance and other portions of the town hall:

1. The First Family’s Compassion

After recounting the night he found out his son had died from opioids, Bolling reiterated that it was never his desire to become an “accidental expert.”

“I’ve made it my passion to talk to people, to talk to young people,” he told the students at the university in Lynchburg, Virginia.

Bolling said President Donald Trump and the first lady called him while he and his wife Adrienne were in Colorado to retrieve their son’s body.

The president, he said, told him: “I can’t imagine what you’re going through, but whatever you need we’ll take care of it.”

The Trumps called again on Thanksgiving last year to check in on the Bolling family and express their condolences.

2. The First Lady’s Motive

Melania Trump’s “Be Best” initiative aimed at American children has three prongs: general well-being, social media use, and opioid abuse.

Until recently, she has focused mainly on young mothers and babies afflicted with neonatal abstinence syndrome, which occurs when a baby is born addicted to opioids because of the mother’s use of the drugs while pregnant.

“When I took on opioid abuse as one of the pillars of my initiative Be Best, I did it with the goal of helping children of all ages,” Trump said.

The first lady commended the Bolling family for their activism in the wake of Eric Chase’s death:

It takes such a strength and grace to take the grief I know you and Adrienne deal with each day and use the loss of your son Eric as a catalyst for good. You honor him every day through the lives that you are saving. I am inspired by the work you are doing, and hope you know that my husband and his entire administration are committed to fighting the opioid epidemic.

And, Bolling asked, what about those red Christmas trees inside the White House that have drawn some criticism?

“We are in [the] 21st century, and everybody has a different taste. I think they look fantastic,” the first lady said with a laugh.    

3. The Demographic Is Everybody

Azar, the president’s health and human services secretary, told the audience that addiction awareness is key.

The administration has released a series of public service ads in a campaign called “The Truth About Opioids.”

“Frankly, they ought to scare you,” Azar said of the ads.

Azar, who has a pharmaceutical background, said the targeted demographic is “everybody,” unfortunately, with nearly 133 Americans dying each day from opioids.

He did point out one optimistic statistic, saying that under the Trump administration, legal prescribing of opioids is down by 23 percent.

“The majority of people who become addicted to opioids today were prescribed a legal painkiller for wisdom teeth, a knee surgery, something like that,” Azar said.

4. A Pound of Fentanyl Can Cause 150,000 Deaths  

Nielsen said the Department of Homeland Security is focused on stopping illicit drugs from coming across the border, including on ships or airplanes.

She singled out fentanyl, one of the most dangerous opioids on the streets.

“The most difficult part to get at is most of the fentanyl is still coming from China through the mail,” Nielsen said.  

The president signed legislation called the Synthetics Trafficking and Overdose Prevention (STOP) Act, which gives the U.S. Postal Service the ability to prescreen international shipments for illegal substances.

To help private mail companies such as FedEx or UPS, homeland security officials use the agency’s National Targeting Center to spot shipping patterns that seem off. China also has cooperated by providing advance information about shipments so the department can better target resources.

5. Getting Rid of the Stigma

The first lady also addressed a major obstacle in the battle.

“We must commit to removing the stigma of shame that comes with addiction and helping change public opinion, so that people find evidence-based treatment before it is too late,” she cautioned.  

It’s a sentiment that Bolling has shared and discussed in depth over the past year.

Addiction “is not a moral failing, it is a medical issue,” Azar said.

The post 5 Key Themes at the First Lady’s Opioid Town Hall With Eric Bolling appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2QoN6hn
via IFTTT

Conservative Republican Ron DeSantis and progressive Democrat Andrew Gillum presented voters with starkly different choices on an array of issues, none more distinctively polar than their plans for charter schools.

In short, DeSantis proposed expanding them while Gillum espoused “siphoning them off” as drains on the public school system.

That distinction—rather than the personalities and ideologies involved—may have compelled about 100,000 African-American women, the vast majority registered Democrats, to vote for DeSantis over Gillum on Nov. 6, according to William Mattox, director of the Marshall Center for Educational Options at the James Madison Institute, a Tallahassee-based conservative think tank.

According to a CNN exit poll, of the roughly 650,000 black women who voted in Florida, 18 percent chose DeSantis over Gillum—an unexpected wedge of support by “school-choice moms” that was the difference in the race, concludes Mattox in a Wall Street Journal analysis of Florida’s midterm elections.

“While 18 percent of the black female vote in Florida is equal to less than 2 percent of the total electorate, in an election decided by fewer than [32,463] votes, these 100,000 black women proved decisive,” Mattox writes.

More than 290,000 students are enrolled in the state’s 650 charter schools. In addition, about 108,000 low-income students participate in the Step Up For Students program, which grants tax-credit funded scholarships to attend private schools.

According to Mattox, most Step Up students are minorities whose mothers are registered Democrats.

“Yet, many of these ‘school-choice moms’ vote for gubernatorial candidates committed to protecting their ability to choose where their child goes to school,” he writes.

During the campaign, DeSantis promised to expand corporate tax credits to grow school choice voucher programs and to increase funding for the programs by at least the annual allowable growth rate of 25 percent beginning next year.

A 25 percent increase in the $873 million spent last year in school choice vouchers would mean $218 million more for charter schools—or nearly $1.1 billion in fiscal year 2020.

Gillum opposed the growth of charter schools, claiming proponents are “siphoning off public money into privately run schools” that are “unaccountable, for-profit charter schools who want to use public dollars to enrich their executives.”

“We’ve got to begin to bring that to conclusion,” Gillum wrote in his campaign statement. “It’s been 20 years of the underfunding, the defunding of the public [school] system, which still educates over 90 percent of our kids.”

DeSantis’ support for charter schools was more compelling than any other reason for this “apparent ticket-splitting” by nearly one-fifth of African-American women in the DeSantis-Gillum race, the James Madison Institute maintains.

Of those same African-American women cited in CNN’s exit poll, more than 90 percent supported Democrat Bill Nelson’s failed bid for a fourth term.

Nelson ultimately lost to term-limited Republican Gov. Rick Scott by 10,033 votes out of 8.22 million cast, while Gillum lost to DeSantis by 32,463 votes out of 8.19 million ballots cast.

The “school-choice moms” vote “helps explain why the Florida governor’s race wasn’t as close as the Florida Senate race, though Gillum was widely expected to carry Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson to victory on his coattails,” Mattox writes.

Gillum “chose to ignore signs that many minority voters view school choice as ‘the civil rights issue of our time,’ to quote Condoleezza Rice,” he writes. “Mr. Gillum figured his charm and potential to become the state’s first black governor would win over African-American voters.”

Florida is not the only state with “school-choice moms,” Mattox notes. “The unexpected outcome of the Florida governor’s race should encourage Republicans nationwide to pitch their education agenda to minority voters,” he writes.

The fact that moms aren’t bound by ideology, or afraid to cross party lines, to vote for someone honestly addressing their concerns should serve as an example for everyone, Mattox writes.

“Most of all, Florida’s surprising outcome ought to encourage every American—especially in these hyperpolarized times—to support policies that bring together strange bedfellows to solve serious problems,” he concludes.

Originally published on Watchdog.org

The post DeSantis Gets Unexpected Boost From African-American ‘School-Choice Moms’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2SgP9RJ
via IFTTT

Why did Russia decide to ratchet up tensions with Ukraine and seize three ships Sunday? Do Ukranians fear their long war with Russia is about to reach a new, more intensive stage? Nolan Peterson, The Daily Signal’s foreign correspondent, joins us from Ukraine to share what he’s seeing and hearing. Plus: A new survey shows some young adults think President Barack Obama was better than George Washington.

We also cover these stories:

  • Special counsel Robert Mueller is expected to issue his report on the 2016 elections in the near future—but he’s also now accusing former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort of lying to investigators.
  • Three American soldiers died Tuesday in Afghanistan, due to a roadside bomb.
  • President Donald Trump is threatening a 10 percent tariff on iPhones, which are assembled in China.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunesSoundCloudGoogle Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

The post Podcast: After Russia’s Act of Aggression, What the View on the Ground Is in Ukraine appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2SiqyMj
via IFTTT

What do you think of the proposition that no black youngsters should be saved from educational rot until all can be saved?

Black people cannot afford to accept such a proposition. Actions by the education establishment, black and white liberal politicians, and some civil rights organizations appear to support the proposition.

Let’s look at it with the help of some data developed by my friend and colleague Thomas Sowell.

The Nation’s Report Card for 2017 showed the following reading scores for fourth-graders in New York state’s public schools: Thirty-two percent scored below basic, with 32 percent scoring basic, 27 percent scoring proficient, and 9 percent scoring advanced. When it came to black fourth-graders in the state, 19 percent scored proficient, and 3 percent scored advanced.

Sowell compared 2016-17 scores on the New York state ELA test. Thirty percent of Brooklyn’s William Floyd elementary school third-graders scored well below proficient in English and language arts, but at a Success Academy charter school in the same building, only one did.

At William Floyd, 36 percent were below proficient, with 24 percent being proficient and none being above proficient. By contrast, at Success Academy, only 17 percent of third-graders were below proficient, with 70 percent being proficient and 11 percent being above proficient.

Among Success Academy’s fourth-graders, 51 percent and 43 percent, respectively, scored proficient and above proficient, while their William Floyd counterparts scored 23 percent and 6 percent, respectively, proficient and above proficient. It’s worthwhile stressing that William Floyd and this Success Academy location have the same address.

Similar high performance can be found in the Manhattan charter school KIPP Infinity Middle School among its sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-graders when compared with that of students at New Design Middle School, a public school at the same location.

Liberals believe integration is a necessary condition for black academic excellence. Public charter schools such as those mentioned above belie that vision.

Sowell points out that only 39 percent of students in all New York state schools who were recently tested scored at the “proficient” level in math, but 100 percent of the students at the Crown Heights Success Academy tested proficient. Blacks and Hispanics constitute 90 percent of the students in that Success Academy.

There’s little question that charter schools provide superior educational opportunities for black youngsters. In a story The New York Times ran about charter schools earlier this month, “With Democratic Wins, Charter Schools Face a Backlash in N.Y. and Other States,” John Liu, an incoming Democratic state senator from Queens, said New York City should “get rid of” large charter school networks. State Sen.-elect Julia Salazar, D-Brooklyn, said, “I’m not interested in privatizing our public schools.”

The New York Times went on to say, “Over 100,000 students in hundreds of the city’s charter schools are doing well on state tests, and tens of thousands of children are on waiting lists for spots.”

One would think that black politicians and civil rights organizations would support charter schools. To the contrary, they want to saddle charter schools with procedures that make so many public schools a failure.

For example, the NAACP demands that charter schools “cease expelling students that public schools have a duty to educate.” It wants charter schools to “cease to perpetuate de facto segregation of the highest performing children from those whose aspirations may be high but whose talents are not yet as obvious.” Most importantly, it wants charter schools to come under the control of teachers unions.

Charter schools have an advantage that some call “selection bias.” Because charter schools require parents to apply or enter lotteries for their children’s admission, they attract more students who have engaged parents and students who are higher-achieving and better behaved.

Many in the teaching establishment who are against parental alternatives want alternatives for themselves.

In Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, 25 percent of public school teachers send their children to private schools. In Philadelphia, 44 percent of teachers do so. In Cincinnati, it’s 41 percent. In Chicago, 39 percent do, and in Rochester, New York, it’s 38 percent.

This demonstrates the dishonesty, hypocrisy, and arrogance of the elite. Their position is, “One thing for thee and another for me.”

The post How Liberal Policy Keeps Black Kids From Succeeding appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2FIxBN9
via IFTTT

The mainstream media and Democrats have criticized the Trump administration’s response to the migrant caravans storming the nation’s southern border.

However, many of the critiques either don’t provide full context or are factually incorrect, based on information released Tuesday by the Department of Homeland Security.

Here are three narratives that the Department of Homeland Security is pushing back against:

1. Separating Myth From Fact on Child Separation

The long-running narrative has been that Border Patrol officials are separating children from parents. However, that doesn’t take into account fraudulent families, DHS spokeswoman Katie Waldman noted in a statement.

From April 19 to Sept. 30, the government separated a total of 507 illegal immigrants within “family units” that weren’t legitimate, meaning the adults were not parents or guardians of the children, Waldman said.

A total of 170 family units were separated based on lack of family relation, she said, including 197 adults and 139 juveniles.  Another 87 family units, including 171 adults, were separated based on a child determined to be over 18.

The Rio Grande Valley in Texas had the highest number of reported fraudulent cases.

“In response to the misreporting from multiple outlets, I wanted to highlight the rampant fraud taking place at our Southern border,” Waldman said in the statement. “Aliens know that if they bring any minor with them, they will be apprehended by Border Patrol and released into the interior of the United States.”

She clarified, however, that the department isn’t claiming all cases are fraudulent.

“This data does not show, nor does DHS assert, that all minors apprehended as part of a family unit are illegitimate, but it does indicate that there is a significant problem that provides DHS the needed authority to protect the best interests and welfare of all children,” Waldman said.

The separation policy was based on a culmination of court decisions and legislation since the 1990s.

In 1997, the Clinton administration entered into something called the Flores Settlement Agreement, which ended a class-action lawsuit first brought in the 1980s.

The settlement established a policy that the federal government would release unaccompanied minors from custody to their parents, relatives, or other caretakers after no more than 20 days, or, alternatively, determine the “least restrictive” setting for the child.

In a separate development, in 2008, a Democrat-controlled Congress approved bipartisan legislation to combat human trafficking, and President George W. Bush, a Republican, signed it into law.

Section 235(g) of that law, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, states that unaccompanied minors entering the United States must be transferred to the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement, rather than to the Department of Homeland Security.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit expanded the Flores settlement in 2016 to include children brought to the country illegally by their parents.

2. Tear-Gassing Children

The caravan still moving toward the U.S.-Mexico border includes 8,500 migrants, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

Media outlets and Democratic politicians seized on children being among the migrants bearing the brunt of tear gas deployed Sunday along the California border, when hundreds of the migrants rushed the border.

Ben Rhodes, a one-time national security adviser to then-President Barack Obama, pounced.

However, the Obama administration used tear gas at the border on a monthly basis, The Washington Times reported.

Also, the Obama administration used pepper spray when a far smaller contingent of only 100 immigrants charged the border in 2013, The San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement Monday that the current violent rush on the border eclipsed prior problems.

Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen provided the following statement regarding the recent crisis on our southern border. “Given…

Posted by Department of Homeland Security on Monday, November 26, 2018

“First, the violence we saw at the border was entirely predictable. This caravan, unlike previous caravans, had already entered #Mexico violently and attacked border police in two other countries,” the secretary said in a Facebook post.

“I refuse to believe that anyone honestly maintains that attacking law enforcement with rocks and projectiles is acceptable. It is shocking that I have to explain this, but officers can be seriously or fatally injured in such attacks. Self-defense isn’t debatable for most law-abiding Americans.”

She added: “[T]he caravan is far larger and more organized than previous ones. There are 8,500 caravan members in Tijuana and Mexicali. There are reports of additional caravans on their way.”

3. Not Legal Asylum-Seekers

Critics of the Trump administration contend the migrants have a legal right to seek asylum in the United States.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., tweeted:


However, Nielsen pushed back, noting that many of the migrants in the caravan do not legally qualify for asylum. Meanwhile, most are not women and children.

The homeland security secretary wrote:

Historically, less than 10% of those who claim asylum from #Guatemala, #Honduras, and #ElSalvador are found eligible by a federal judge. 90% are not eligible. Most of these migrants are seeking jobs or to join family who are already in the U.S. They have all refused multiple opportunities to seek protection in Mexico or with the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency.

She also said “the caravan members are predominantly male.”

“It appears in some cases that the limited number of women and children in the caravan are being used by the organizers as ‘human shields’ when they confront law enforcement,” Nielsen wrote.

“They are being put at risk by the caravan organizers, as we saw at the Mexico-Guatemala border. This is putting vulnerable people in harm’s way,” Nielsen said.

This story was corrected to note that the Obama administration used pepper spray at the border in a 2013 incident.

The post Debunking 3 Myths About Trump Border Enforcement appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2FHRfJe
via IFTTT

Last month, several dozen religious leaders reaffirmed a number of radical economic propositions contained within the 1973 Chicago Declaration of Evangelical Social Concern.

“Before God and a billion hungry neighbors, we must rethink our values regarding our present standard of living,” proclaims the document. The document goes on to lament the “materialism of our culture and the maldistribution of the nation’s wealth and services.”

According to these leaders, the United States holds a “crucial role in the balance and injustice of international trade and development.” To secure an “abundant life for all of God’s children,” these activists propose “a more just acquisition and redistribution of the world’s resources.”

Good intentions notwithstanding, enactment of their economic agenda would actually stifle the widespread abundance produced by free market capitalism.

This thinly veiled embrace of Marxism initially occurred at the height of the Cold War. In the half-century prior to 1973, many governments elsewhere forcefully enacted a “more just” redistribution. The Soviets outright confiscated private farmland upon coming to power in Russia in 1917. Likewise, China’s communist regime under Mao Zedong began redistributing private land holdings upon coming to power in 1949. In 1959, the regime of Cuba’s Fidel Castro nationalized private businesses and property in the aftermath of the revolution.

Far from being an abstract dispute, the physical and intellectual war between free market capitalism and socialism was intensely raging by 1973.

To affirm the economic pronouncements in the Chicago Declaration would be to reject the reality of the last 45 years. Consider the turnaround the United Kingdom has made following broad privatization in the 1980s, or the booms that came to Vietnam and China as capitalism was adopted. Look at the wealth of Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea—some of the freest economies in the world.

Meanwhile, the socialist economies of Spain and Greece continue to flounder while Venezuela degenerates under the burden of Bolivarian revolution.

Far from perpetuating injustice, the expansion of international trade has coincided with a surge in the quality of life for many millions of people. In the words of World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim, “Over the last 25 years, more than a billion people have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty, and the global poverty rate is now lower than it has ever been in recorded history. This is one of the greatest human achievements of our time.”

Of course, wages in the developing world remain lower than those in more advanced economies. But these wages represent a marked improvement from yesteryear. The transformation in living standards today is eclipsing even the rapid pace of improvement that the West experienced during the Industrial Revolution two centuries ago.

The signatories of this statement decry “a national pathology of war and violence which victimizes our neighbors at home and abroad.”

Yet the United States has sacrificed greatly to defeat Nazism, communism, fascism, terrorism, and imperialism over the past century. We’ve rebuilt war-ravaged countries—including those of former enemies such as Germany and Japan. We’ve made seas across the globe safe for trade. Our investments overseas in countries that welcome foreign capital have directly expanded prosperity across the globe.

And beyond this, our nation liberally shares the concepts that continue to make us an economic powerhouse—notions such as private property rights and the rule of law.

Central planning, a capping of consumer demand, and a redistribution of resources are not the keys to economic “justice.” After years of travelling to impoverished parts of the globe, U2’s Bono bravely shared his altered take on capitalism:

Rock star preaches capitalism—wow. Sometimes I hear myself and I just cannot believe it. But commerce is real … aid is just a stop-gap. Commerce, entrepreneurial capitalism takes more people out of poverty than aid—of course, we know that.

In light of recent history, perhaps now is the time for the heirs of the 1973 declaration to graciously admit their misdiagnosis.

The post The Gospel of Marx? Religious Leaders Call for ‘Redistribution,’ Denounce ‘Pathology of War’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2r7zx7x
via IFTTT

Every Wednesday, the second hour of my national radio show is the “Male/Female Hour.” A few weeks ago, a woman named Jennifer called in.

For reasons of space, I have somewhat shortened her comments. Every young woman should read them. This is precisely what she said:

“Dennis, I want to get right to it. I’m 50 years old with four college degrees. I was raised by a feminist mother with no father in the home. My mother told me get an education to the maximum level so that you can get out in the world, make a lot of money. And that’s the path I followed. I make adequate money. I don’t make a ton of money. But I do make enough to support my own household.

“I want to tell women in their 20s: Do not follow the path that I followed. You are leading yourself to a life of loneliness. All of your friends will be getting married and having children, and you’re working to compete in the world, and what you’re doing is competing with men. Men don’t like competitors. Men want a partner. It took me until my late 40s to realize this.

“And by the time you have your own household with all your own bills, you can’t get off that track, because now you’ve got to make the money to pay your bills. It’s hard to find a partner in your late 40s to date because you also start losing self-confidence about your looks, your body. It’s not the same as it was in your 20s. You try to do what you can to make your life fulfilling. I have cats and dogs. But it’s lonely when you see your friends having children, going on vacations, planning the lives of their children, and you don’t do anything at night but come home to your cats and dogs. I don’t want other women to do what I have done.”

I asked, “Was it hard for you to make this call?”

She responded: “It was. I want to be anonymous because I don’t want people that I know to really know my true feelings. Because you do act like ‘My career is everything. I love working.’ But it’s a lie on the inside for me. It’s unfortunate. I didn’t realize this until it’s too late. I don’t know if it’s too late. I would like to find somebody to go on vacation with.

“You have other concerns when you get older and you live alone. Who’s going to take you to your medical appointments? If something should happen to you, there’s no other income there to help you. These are things you don’t understand when you’re in your 20s because you don’t think you’ll ever get old and have health problems.

“I’m stuck now because I go to work every day. I smile like I love it, but it’s very painful to not plan a vacation with someone. It’s painful to not have a Thanksgiving dinner with someone. You sit home alone and you do nothing. I avoid my friends now that have children because I have nothing in common with them.

“Somebody asked me the other day, ‘Why did you stay single and never have kids?’ There’s answers: Because I was brainwashed by my mother into this. But it’s hard and it’s shameful to tell people, ‘I don’t know. I ran out of time.’

“There’s not a good answer for it except: ‘I was programmed to get into the workforce, compete with men, and make money.’ Supposedly, that would be a fulfilling life. But I was told that by a feminist mother who was divorced, who hated her husband—my father.

“She tried to steer me on what she thought was the right path, but feminism is a lie. That’s what I want women to know.

“I didn’t realize this until late in life. I want to tell women: Find someone in your 20s. That’s when you’re still very cute. That’s when you’re still amiable to working out problems with someone. It’s harder in your 50s, when you’ve lived alone, to compromise with someone, to have someone in your home and every little thing about them annoys you because you’re so used to being alone. It’s hard to undo that, so don’t do what I did. Find someone in your 20s.”

I said, “I’m thinking of transcribing your call and making it a column.”

“Do that, Dennis. I want to help whoever I can,” she said.

The post A Middle-Aged Career Woman on the Lies of Feminism She Learned Too Late appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2Sh2n0W
via IFTTT

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley have rightly condemned Russia’s recent undue acts of aggression against Ukraine.

Monday’s condemnation follows a provocation in the Black Sea the day before, when Russian Federal Security Service border patrol boats attacked and seized three Ukrainian maritime vessels.

Pompeo’s and Haley’s statements rightly reaffirmed U.S. support for Ukraine in its war against a bellicose Russia.

The incident in question began early Sunday morning, when Russian border patrol boats intercepted two Ukrainian navy artillery ships and a tugboat near the Kerch Strait, which connects the Black and Azov seas.

Later in the day, Russian forces fired at the same three ships—injuring six Ukrainian sailors—boarded, and seized the Ukrainian navy vessels, and detained 24 sailors.

In a statement released Monday, Pompeo appropriately classified Russia’s hostility near the Kerch Strait as “a dangerous escalation and a violation of international law.”

He continued by calling on Russia to return the Ukrainian vessels and detained crew members, “and to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters.”

“As stated in our Crimea Declaration, the United States rejects Russia’s attempted annexation of Crimea,” Pompeo said.

The secretary of state also called on both nations to “abide by their international obligations.” He asked for Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Russian President Vladimir Putin to “engage directly to resolve the situation.”

>>> After 4.5 Years of a Stalemated War, Ukraine Braces for a Full-On Russian Invasion

The Kremlin’s claim that the Ukrainian vessels had illegally entered Russian territorial waters and were trying to spur conflict is not a legitimate justification. It’s important to remember that Russia is the belligerent here, and the United States is right to back Ukraine.

Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, first illegally annexing Crimea and subsequently sparking conflict in the eastern Donbas region. And, although the Kerch Strait and Azov Sea are shared territorial waters under the 2003 Treaty on the Legal Status of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, Russia has repeatedly violated the treaty and international freedom of navigation laws.

The Russians have detained Ukrainian fishing vessels and even closed the Kerch Strait twice last year, costing Ukraine millions of dollars from halted shipping.

In the Trump administration’s first public reaction to Sunday’s incident, Haley harshly criticized Russia on the floor of the United Nations for what she called an “arrogant act that the international community must condemn and will never accept.”

During an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting on Monday, Haley stood up to Putin and Russia, declaring, “This is no way for a law-abiding, civilized nation to act. Impeding Ukraine’s lawful transit through the Kerch Strait is a violation under international law.”

>>> On the Brink of Major War? Ukraine Grapples With Russian Attack

The United States has long aided Ukraine in its struggle against its larger, more aggressive neighbor.

The U.S. has provided Ukraine with a variety of equipment, including counter-artillery radars, tactical unmanned aerial vehicles, medical equipment, logistical infrastructure, night-vision and thermal goggles, and armored civilian SUVs.

Also, this past spring, the U.S. sold a host of Javelin anti-tank missiles to the Ukrainian military to aid in defense against Russian aggression in the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

More recently, in September, the U.S. signed off on providing two patrol boats to Ukraine within the next year.

The United States has also given Ukraine plenty of non-military support, including aid in the “economic, energy, humanitarian, democracy, good governance and health realms,” according to the U.S. Ukraine Foundation.

Both Pompeo’s and Haley’s statements this week have helped affirm that America’s commitment to its allies is unwavering and that support for Ukraine is appropriate and should continue unabated.

The post Pompeo, Haley Condemn Russian Aggression Against Ukraine appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2SkuBrM
via IFTTT

Mental illness is a very real problem that affects many aspects of our society.

In the United States, as of 2016, an estimated 10.4 million adults suffer from a serious mental illness, such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, for which there is no cure.

One of the most complex societal aspects affected by mental illness is criminal justice.

Some individuals with mental illnesses have a propensity to commit crimes because they have delusions and distorted perceptions of reality, live on the streets, or have drug and/or alcohol addictions.

While these individuals should not be excused for committing a crime, they should be afforded an opportunity to have a better life by receiving treatment, rather than going in and out of jail or prison with no hope for the future.

By giving these individuals a chance, we make our society a better and safer place—and that’s true for all criminals, not just those with serious mental illnesses.

I recently had the opportunity to observe how the D.C. Superior Court is giving mentally ill criminal defendants a chance to change their lives.

The experience was enlightening.

Specifically, I observed and toured the D.C. Superior Mental Health Community Court, which was established in 2007.

The court is a voluntary treatment court focused on criminal defendant rehabilitation and treatment, as opposed to retribution.

The court’s case-management plan provides criminal defendants who are diagnosed with a serious mental illness an opportunity to have their criminal charges reduced, convictions removed, or sentences shortened so long as they participate in treatment programs for their mental illnesses and any substance abuse problems.

As of October 2017, “the court has provided services to more than 3,500 defendants facing misdemeanor charges and has certified 452 defendants facing felony charges to the program,” according to Cleonia Terry, the court’s coordinator.

An important feature of the court is that not all criminal defendants are eligible for the program.

Only defendants with limited criminal histories who are charged with misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies are eligible to have their cases moved to the court.

Additionally, only individuals diagnosed by the D.C. Pretrial Services Agency with a serious and persistent mental illness are eligible for it.

During my time in the courtroom, I observed the full gamut of its cases.

One defendant agreed to have his felony drug offense reduced to a misdemeanor in exchange for continued participation in mental health and substance abuse treatment programs.

During his hearing, that defendant remarked how appreciative he was for the opportunity to turn his life around.

Two other individuals graduated from the court’s program the day I was there, and had their cases dismissed, after they successfully completed their treatment programs in satisfaction of the terms of the agreements they entered into with the prosecutor and the court.

The excitement on their faces was evident as the court handed them a certificate of achievement and other tokens to help them remember all they had accomplished.

The graduation ceremonies concluded when the individuals signed their name on a label, which was then placed alongside the names of others who have graduated from the program.

Unfortunately, I also observed defendants who were struggling to make progress.

One defendant admitted he was battling a drug addiction and having family problems, which were preventing him from advancing to the next step in the process.

Another defendant had recently tested positive for alcohol use, which meant she was not eligible at the time to move forward with resolving her charges.

To my surprise, a defendant even came before the court and asked the court to transfer his case back to the D.C. Superior Court’s criminal docket because he was not willing to move forward with treatment.

Certainly, these individuals are going through more difficult times in their lives than the other defendants who were making progress in the specialty court.

But for any of these individuals, I imagine that those times would be much more difficult if they were not given at least a chance to seek treatment.

And that was a lesson learned from sitting in the courtroom.

Regardless of whether the individuals were struggling to begin treatment, just starting treatment, or completing treatment, I wondered how different their lives might be if they were not in that court.

I surely do not think they would be better, and neither would society, if they were sitting in jail, getting little or no help at all.

For some, maybe that is the case, but for others, that’s an unlikely scenario.

Most of the men and women in the court that day were taking positive steps to improve their situations and their mental health problems, and they should be rewarded for it.

Again, no criminal should be excused for committing a crime, but those with mental illnesses should be given an opportunity to receive treatment for their illnesses and an opportunity to have a better life.

The Mental Health Community Court is giving them that opportunity, and by doing so, making Washington, D.C., a better and safer place.

The post How DC’s Mental Health Community Court Is Giving the Mentally Ill a More Hopeful Future appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2FQpz4I
via IFTTT

Each time an end-of-the-world prophecy is delivered—whether by a self-deluded preacher, a group of politicians, or scientists—we are told that we must believe. Never mind how many of their prophecies have been wrong in the past, this time they mean it.

The latest prophecy of doom and planetary extinction comes from a government report authored by people appointed during the Obama administration. This report, and others before it, concluded that Earth is warming, humans are responsible, and that we have only 10 years to fix it.

But wait, haven’t there been earlier deadlines, which have passed, and aren’t we still here with weather patterns behaving much as they have before, to wit, hot summers, cold winters, fires, floods, and earthquakes?

Paul Krugman, the notoriously wrong columnist for The New York Times (he predicted “a global recession, with no end in sight,” if Donald Trump became president), has gone beyond science, labeling those who disagree with global warmists “depraved.”

When you resort to name-calling, you have lost the argument.

Granted, people these days tend to listen only to information that ratifies beliefs they already hold. On this issue, the warmist cult promotes only information—whether it is from people masquerading as scientists, like Bill Nye “the science guy,” who is not a scientist but a mechanical engineer, to others with credentials mostly outside of climatology.

So, what is the truth and how can we know it?

The media and much of political Washington, including even a few Republicans, have accepted this flawed doctrine as truth. They claim climate change is “settled science” and many believe it. Why? Because of unsettling comments from scientists with experience and knowledge in the field; scientists who lack a political agenda are largely ignored.

Responding to the government report, ClimateDepot.com, my favorite website with links to knowledgeable and skeptical scientists, notes:

The National Climate Assessment report as reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences, is basing one of its headline scare scenario(s) on a study funded by climate activist billionaire Tom Steyer. Climate expert Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. noted on November 24 that the claim of economic damage from climate change is based on a 15 degree F temperature increase that is double the ‘most extreme value reported elsewhere in the report.’ The ‘sole editor’ of this claim in the report was an alum of the Center for American Progress, which is also funded by Tom Steyer.

Climatologist Pat Michaels calls the government report “systematically flawed” and says it “should be shelved.”

John P. Dunne is head of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University. His webpage describes him as “an expert in ocean biogeochemistry, climate and earth system modeling with over 20 years of experience developing instruments, collecting field observations, and performing analysis and modeling studies.”

He wrote Climate Depot: “Two years into the Trump administration it is sad to see this 400-page pile of crap.”

Climate Depot founder Marc Morano says of the government report:

It is a political report masquerading as science. The media is hyping a rehash of frightening climate change claims by Obama administration holdover activist government scientists. The new report is once again predetermined science. The National Climate Assessment report reads like a press release from environmental pressure groups—because it is! Two key authors are longtime Union of Concerned Scientist activists, Donald Wuebbles and Katharine Hayhoe.

The Trump administration has promised to issue its own report that will include “more transparent and data-driven information.”

If these scare tactics by leftists who want even more government control over our lives were to be accepted as fact, our economy would crumble and the outcome would produce little, if any, change in global temperatures.

Riots in Paris over the rise in the gas tax imposed by President Emmanuel Macron in an effort to minimize France’s reliance on fossil fuels are an indication of how little the public is willing to tolerate even the smallest economic fluctuation. French gas prices are now over $7 a gallon.

Would Americans accept a similar scenario here if we embraced flawed climate change “science” and its pronouncements of doom, our markets crashed, and the economy spiraled out of control?

I doubt it.

(c) 2018 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The post ‘A Political Report Masquerading as Science’: The Truth About the New Climate Report appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2FWpY5Y
via IFTTT

Where do you begin if you’re thinking about homeschooling? Can you do it if you’re not a teacher? And how can you make sure your kids get enough socialization? We’re joined by a special guest, Colleen Trinko—yes, Kate’s mom! Colleen, who is a teacher, homeschooled her five children for many years, and now works with other homeschool families to advise. Plus: A feminist is kicked off Twitter, seemingly for saying “Men aren’t women.” 


We also cover these stories:

  • President Donald Trump is now threatening additional tariffs on cars in response to General Motors Co.’s announcement of layoffs and plant closings.
  • Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says there’s no “direct reporting” linking the Saudi crown prince to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
  • In an interview, Ivanka Trump made the case for why her use of a personal email was not at all the same as what Hillary Clinton had done.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunesSoundCloudGoogle Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

The post Podcast: A Homeschooling Mom Shares Why, and How appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2rd5hZg
via IFTTT

Nancy Pelosi is on her way again to becoming speaker of the House of Representatives when Democrats regain control in the new year, after being nominated Wednesday by a 203-32 vote.

House Democrats renominated Pelosi for the top spot, paving the way for a full House vote in January, despite the concerns of some that the party should choose a new leader rather than the veteran California Democrat.

“I will vote for Nancy Pelosi to be our next speaker because she has personally committed to me that she will reform the legislative process, make it more transparent, and allow the diverse ideas of all members to be considered,” Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said in a statement issued before the vote.

“Specifically, she shares my view that committees must be empowered to do the hard and important work of writing legislation in the light of day and ideally in a bipartisan fashion,” Welch said.

Pelosi’s margin of victory Wednesday was a significant boost from Democrats’ vote of 134-63 in 2016 for her to be House minority leader.

Pelosi will need 218 votes to gain the speakership; Democrats will hold at least 233 seats in the House when the new Congress convenes in January.

On Nov. 19, a total of 16 House Democrats released a letter saying they would not vote for Pelosi.

Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, toyed with the idea of opposing Pelosi, but announced Nov. 20 that she would support Pelosi, who created a committee chairmanship for Fudge.

Pelosi, 78, wielded the speaker’s gavel from 2007 to 2011. She has been a member of the House since 1987.

The post Pelosi Secures Democrats’ Nomination for House Speaker appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2KJU6Ac
via IFTTT

Ivanka Trump, elder daughter and senior adviser of President Donald Trump, broke her silence Wednesday on the controversy surrounding her use of private email to conduct state business during her early days in the White House.

In an interview with ABC News’ Deborah Roberts in Idaho, Ivanka Trump said she saw “no equivalency” between her use of private email and Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email account and server to conduct official business during four years as secretary of state.

“People who want to see it as the same see it as the same,” Trump told Roberts while on a trip promoting STEM initiatives (for science, technology, engineering, and math) with Apple CEO Tim Cook.

Trump argued that no comparison can be made with Clinton’s routine use of unsecure private email as President Barack Obama’s first secretary of state, something her father and his supporters frequently targeted on the 2016 campaign trail, often chanting, “Lock her up!”

“All of my emails are stored and preserved,” Trump said. “There were no deletions, there is no attempt to hide. There’s no equivalency to what my father has spoken about.”

“So the idea of ‘Lock her up!’ doesn’t apply to you?” Roberts asked.

“No,” Trump replied.

Trump explained that while Clinton’s use of a private email account included sending classified information over a private server, her own use of private email followed White House protocol and contained nothing confidential.

“There is no restriction of using personal email,” Trump noted. “In fact, we’re instructed that if we receive an email to our personal account that could relate to government work, you simply just forward it to your government account so it can be archived.”

The president defended his daughter’s use of private email in early 2017 the day after The Washington Post broke the story earlier this month.

“She wasn’t doing anything to hide her emails,” the president told reporters on the South Lawn of the White House. “They were not classified, unlike Hillary Clinton, which were classified. It is all fake news.”

Democrats, however, said Nov. 20 that they plan to investigate Ivanka Trump’s private email use in the White House, The New York Times reported. 

Several prominent Republicans, including Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., have endorsed looking into her practice, according to Newsweek.

The post Ivanka Trump Sees ‘No Equivalency’ With Hillary Clinton’s Use of Private Email appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2BDLNTC
via IFTTT

KYIV, Ukraine—Sunday’s Kerch Strait crisis underscored how quickly Russia’s simmering, 4.5-year-old, low-intensity war against Ukraine could escalate into a historic catastrophe.

“Yesterday we were close to war. In fact, war happened,” Capt. Andrii Ryzhenko, the Ukrainian navy’s deputy chief of staff for Euro-Atlantic integration, told The Daily Signal on Monday.

On Sunday, Russian ships fired on and captured three Ukrainian navy vessels approaching the Kerch Strait, a narrow waterway that connects the Black Sea to the Sea of Azov. The three Ukrainian vessels, two artillery boats and a tugboat, were in transit from Odesa to the Ukrainian port of Mariupol on the Sea of Azov.

Russian forces reportedly took 24 Ukrainian crew members prisoner during the maritime confrontation. Russia has already tried some of the captured Ukrainians as criminals. Kyiv, however, says the crews should be designated as prisoners of war, subject to the Geneva Conventions.

As of Wednesday, Ukraine’s armed forces remain on full alert. Martial law went into effect on Wednesday morning in 10 Ukrainian regions bordering Russian territory, as well as along the country’s Black Sea and Azov Sea coastlines. Ukrainian regions bordering the breakaway territory of Transnistria in Moldova, where Russia has stationed troops, are also under martial law.

The martial law status is scheduled to last for 30 days, Kyiv says.

Russia, for its part, announced on Wednesday  the deployment of additional, advanced S-400 surface-to-air missiles to Crimea, a peninsula that Russia invaded and seized from Ukraine in 2014.

Russia already has three S-400 units deployed and activated in Crimea, according to Russian news reports. Thus, the entirety of Ukraine’s Black Sea and Sea of Azov coastlines remains under the shadow of Russian surface-to-air missiles—a lethal prospect for Ukraine’s air force.

Ukrainian naval ships are seized by Russia, Nov. 26, 2018. (Photo: Xinhua News Agency/Newscom)

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, meanwhile, has been on a media blitz since Sunday, warning that an ongoing Russian military buildup on Ukraine’s borders could be a precursor to invasion.

“After the incident in the Azov Sea, we had to provide for the Ukrainian armed forces to repel a large-scale ground invasion,” Poroshenko tweeted Wednesday.  “I want no one to think that this is fun and games. The country is under threat of a full-scale war with the Russian Federation.”

During a Tuesday roundtable with a trio of Ukrainian journalists, Poroshenko unveiled a binder of aerial photographs he said were provided by Ukrainian intelligence units. The photos were evidence, the Ukrainian president said, that since Sept. 17 Russia has tripled the number of tanks at a military base only 18 kilometers (11 miles) from the Ukrainian border, underscoring a broader buildup of Russian forces within striking distance of Ukraine.

“The number of [Russian] units re-deployed along the entire length of our border has dramatically increased,” Poroshenko said.

On Wednesday in Mariupol—a Ukrainian port city of 500,000 people on the Sea of Azov—life was reportedly going on as normal, with no visible markers of either the enacted martial law or the military mobilization.

“Everything is as before, as if nothing happened,” Alexey Kelt, a 23- year-old Ukrainian combat veteran who lives in Mariupol told The Daily Signal.

Shattered Status Quo

Russia invaded Ukraine four and a half years ago, and the two erstwhile Soviet allies have been at war—albeit a limited, geographically quarantined one—ever since.

More than 10,300 Ukrainians have so far died in the conflict and on average one Ukrainian soldier still dies in combat every three days. The conflict is Europe’s only ongoing land war.

Since a shaky cease-fire, known as Minsk II, quelled the fighting in February 2015, the physical effects of the war have remained more or less geographically quarantined along a 250-mile-long static and entrenched front line in Ukraine’s embattled southeastern Donbas region. For the most part, the war has been fought from trenches and without the concurrent use of air or maritime forces.

Sunday’s seaborne confrontation, however, shattered the status quo military stalemate between Russia and Ukraine.

For one, it adds a maritime front to the ongoing trench war. It also marks the first time in four and a half years of constant combat that Russia has openly admitted to firing on Ukrainians.

“In fact, what happened on Nov. 25 is an extraordinary event,” Poroshenko said Tuesday.

“For the first time in four and a half years of Russian aggression, officially, without tearing off chevrons, without ‘little green men,’ Russian troops in large numbers attacked the ships of the armed forces of Ukraine,” Poroshenko said.

Martial Law

According to some Ukrainian officials, the martial law that went into effect in parts of Ukraine on Wednesday was designed to cut down on the mobilization and deployment times required by Ukraine’s combined armed forces to defend against a Russian invasion.

Ukraine’s national security doctrine is a mix of conventional military force with the use of irregular, civilian territorial defense forces. Those irregular forces are meant to wage a guerilla war behind the front lines of an enemy invasion.

Thus, officials say that declaring martial law in those regions most vulnerable to a Russian attack puts Ukraine on a fast-tracked war footing now that Russia has signaled its intent to escalate the conflict.

“We already have an escalation and martial law is an opportunity to test the different systems of personnel management to find out our weaknesses and to improve them in case of further [Russian] escalation,” Alex Ryabchyn, a Ukrainian member of parliament, told The Daily Signal.

Echoing that line of thinking, on Wednesday Poroshenko tweeted his rationale for martial law in the context of military readiness: “We should not lose any moment in the event of open, full-scale ground aggression. Use everything: from mobilization to the operation of the territorial defense headquarters. Protecting people is our primary goal. Do not allow the aggressor to break through even farther.”

Thus, with Ukraine’s military—both its regular and irregular units—poised for war, some fear there is little breathing room in the current standoff to absorb another unforeseen crisis without it leading to catastrophe. A miscalculation by either side could spark an uncontrollable chain reaction leading to a general war, especially as the rhetoric between Kyiv and Moscow heats up.

Vladimir Lesovoy, a sailor of one of the three Ukrainian ships that were seized by the Federal Security Service of Russia on Nov. 25 in the Kerch Strait, is accused of illegal Russian border crossing, Nov. 28, 2018. (Photo: Viktor Korotaev/Kommersant Photo/Polaris/Newscom)

“Further escalation of the situation by the Russian Federation should not be ruled out,” Volodymyr Yelchenko, Ukraine’s permanent representative to the United Nations, said at a Monday meeting of the U.N. Security Council.

“According to available intelligence data, there is a clear threat for the invasion and seizing of Mariupol and Berdyansk,” Yelchenko said.

Sunday’s maritime confrontation at the Kerch Strait was a chilling reminder for many Ukrainians of the spring and summer of 2014, when the war with Russia began and the possibility of a full-scale invasion hung over the country like a sword of Damocles.

As evidence of that volatile period, in cities across Ukraine, including the capital city of Kyiv, there are still spray-painted signs on the sides of many buildings pointing to the nearest bomb shelter.

“The situation in Azov Sea has reminded me of the same feeling during the scary days in 2014 in the Donbas. I was refreshing every five seconds the news tabs and Twitter trying to find new information about our sailors and our ships,” said Ryabchyn, the Ukrainian member of parliament.

“But this was the first official attack, not like in 2014 with the little green men without insignia in Crimea, or the so-called separatists,” Ryabchyn added, referring to the patchless Russian soldiers who invaded Crimea in 2014, as well as Russia’s proxy forces in eastern Ukraine.

A New Front

The Kerch Strait divides mainland Russia from the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia invaded and seized from Ukraine in 2014. The narrow maritime passage is the only outlet to the Sea of Azov, where Ukraine has two major ports.

This summer, Russian naval forces stepped up their harassment of Ukrainian merchant vessels in the Sea of Azov, spurring Kyiv to respond.

Along the Sea of Azov coastline, Ukraine has built a network of coastal defenses, including the creation of a new Marine brigade, as well as a new naval base at the port of Berdyansk on the Sea of Azov.

Russia’s 2014 takeover of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula left 80 percent of Ukraine’s navy in the Kremlin’s hands. Rather than replace the blue-water warships lost in Crimea, however, Ukrainian military leaders have prioritized the creation of a “mosquito fleet” of shallow-water craft armed with advanced anti-ship weapons.

To that end, in September the U.S. Coast Guard handed over two of its decommissioned 110-foot armed cutters to Ukraine.

On Sept. 23, two Ukrainian navy vessels effectively ran Russia’s de facto blockade of the Sea of Azov. On that day, as Russian warplanes reportedly buzzed overhead, Russian ships escorted the two Ukrainian naval vessels, the Donbas and the Korets, as they passed through the Kerch Strait, Ukraine’s navy reported at the time.

Once through, the two Ukrainian navy ships were met by a pair of armored Ukrainian Gyurza-M class gunboats in the Sea of Azov, which served as escorts as the four vessels steamed toward the Ukrainian port of Mariupol, arriving there safely on Sept. 25.

The exercise underscored the burgeoning crisis between Russia and Ukraine over the right of free movement through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov.

Now, many Ukrainian officials and experts fear that Sunday’s maritime confrontation at the Kerch Strait could be the opening salvo of a stepped-up Russian gambit to consolidate its control over the entire Sea of Azov basin.

“Russian domination at the Sea of Azov could help to create so-called land corridor to Crimea. This is why Russia uses the boa constrictor strategy at sea,” Ihor Kabanenko, a retired Ukrainian navy admiral, told The Daily Signal.

“Ukraine needs naval forces in the Azov [Sea] to prevent the worst land scenario and to protect its economic interests by using maritime lines,” added Kabanenko, who also formerly served as military representative of Ukraine to NATO, chief of operations of the Ukrainian armed forces, and Ukraine’s deputy chief of defense.

Clear Threat

Since 2014, Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula has become a Russian military redoubt.

From October 2014 (eight months after Russia’s seizure of Crimea) to October 2018, the number of Russian troops in Crimea tripled, Poroshenko said on Tuesday, adding that Russia has also increased its stockpiles of armored personnel carriers, artillery systems, multiple-launch rocket systems, and has deployed more warplanes and ships to the peninsula.

“The buildup is still underway now,” Poroshenko said

“Crimea today continues to play the most important role in maintaining the country’s military security,” Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said in June, the Russian news site TASS reported.

“In the peninsula there has been created a unique combined force and it is being strengthened steadily. Its advanced high-tech weapon systems will leave no chance for a potential enemy that may dare attack this indigenous Russian land,” Shoigu reportedly said.

The shoreline in Mariupol, a key Ukrainian port city on the Sea of Azov. (Photo: Nolan Peterson/The Daily Signal)

Beyond Crimea, Russia has positioned about 77,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders capable of launching a rapid, conventional land invasion, Ukrainian Defense Minister Stepan Poltorak said in April. At that time, Poltorak said Russia had 19 battalion tactical groups near Ukraine’s borders.

On Tuesday, however, a Ukrainian defense spokesman said the number of Russian battalion tactical groups “capable of carrying out combat missions” in Ukrainian territory had risen to 25.

“Since 2013, the Russian Federation has been modernizing its entire airfield network along the Ukrainian border, upgrading the fleet of combat aircraft, and expanding the capabilities of army aviation,” said Vadym Skibitsky, a spokesman for the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, during a Tuesday press conference in Kyiv.

“About 500 combat aircraft of tactical aviation and up to 340 helicopters of army aviation have currently been deployed along the border with Ukraine,” Skibitsky said.

Moreover, inside the two breakaway territories in the Donbas, there are currently about 3,000 Russian soldiers embedded within a larger force of about 34,000 pro-Russian separatists, and foreign mercenaries.

Ukraine, for its part, has about 60,000 troops deployed to the eastern war zone with tens of thousands more deployed to its southern coastal regions, ready to rapidly defend its coastlines on the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea.

Geopolitical Earthquake

Today, Ukraine’s combined military ranks comprise about 250,000 active-duty troops and roughly 80,000 reservists. On the Continent, only Russia’s military is bigger.

Ukraine’s revamped strategic military doctrine now identifies Russia as the country’s top security threat and treats the threat of a major war with Russia with lethal earnestness.

Since 2014, Ukraine has focused on boosting its land warfare units—a reflection of the immediate combat needs of the war in the Donbas.

Yet, with the threat of a Russian invasion in mind, this year Ukraine has stepped up rebuilding its navy and air force, too. Still, Ukraine remains outmatched by Russia’s combined armed forces, some Ukrainian military officials say.

Activists of opposition parties burn flares during a rally demanding to break an agreement with Russia on the use of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait in front of the parliament building in Kyiv, Ukraine, Nov. 26, 2018. (Photo: Gleb Garanich/Reuters/Newscom)

“We are not ready for the war with Russia at sea, even in proactive and asymmetric way,” said Ryzhenko, the Ukrainian navy deputy chief of staff.

Beyond Ukraine, the war’s fallout has reshaped the balance of power in Eastern Europe since 2014, spurring countries across the region to rapidly militarize to defend themselves against the contemporary Russian threat. And when it comes to Russia’s ongoing, multi-domain conflict against the West—all roads lead back to Ukraine.

“In many ways, the future viability of the transatlantic community will be decided in eastern Ukraine in the trenches of the Donbas or on the waters of the Azov,” said Luke Coffey, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy.

“This is why the most recent incident in the Kerch Strait should be so alarming to the U.S. and its European allies,” Coffey said.

The post After 4.5 Years of a Stalemated War, Ukraine Braces for a Full-On Russian Invasion appeared first on The Daily Signal.



from The Daily Signal https://ift.tt/2zr0704
via IFTTT

Know us

Our Team

Tags

Video of the Day

Contact us

Имя

Электронная почта *

Сообщение *